| Author |
The price of losing |
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
|  Posted: 2009-10-12 02:20
So here's the thing.
From times long ago, prestige loss from ships has been pretty linear. You die, you pay for it, and then you go back to work. Over time that cost has steadily increased, and has had many a side effect.
Because at the moment death is so pricey, it tends to discourage some things in the game. Making ships like the dictor practically taboo, and forcing people to run at the slightest hull damage - which in turn decreases prestige gain for other players, which in turn discourages actual battles.
So I went to thinking, why don't we do something a bit more unique in order to promote fighting, so that dying on occasion - while unwanted - isn't completely fun killing as it is now. Thats not to say that dying would be fun, but that it would be less of a downer than it is now.
And I feel I've come up with a way.
The idea is to take the prestige loss for ships low to begin with, 1.480 levels. This means 100-120 prestige for a lost Dreadnought.
One of the biggest things against low prestige loss is that it encouraged the act of throwing away your ships. There was no reason to keep your ship because you could make enough throwing it away that it would not matter.
So, have prestige loss increase from dying, the more you die in a limited time frame. Applies universally to all ships.
This means basically for every death after the first, you incur a consecutively larger penalty. Perhaps, in 50% increases.
This encourages a bit of a reward for players that act to stay alive but conversely, doesn't badly hurt those people who suffer the occasional death, but it DOES hurt those greatly who do not try to keep their ship alive apart from those occasional deaths.
Overall, it increases people's willingness to fight and a general more favorable attitude towards potential death. The risk is still there, but its only there for people who well, suck - or are otherwise careless.
Post your thoughts.
-Ent
Revison - Changed wording to encompass universal death rather than just in a specific ship.
Revision 2 - Changing some wording.
[ This Message was edited by: Enterprise on 2009-10-12 02:50 ]
_________________
|
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
| Posted: 2009-10-12 02:30
I very much like the sound of this idea. I think it would make the flow of battle a lot more fluid. If you lose a ship in a big battle, it's not much of a deal--but it encourages you, and your team, to plan out your next move rather than just throw more ships away.
I really, really like this idea. It would give Darkspace a tactical aspect that I feel is somewhat missing currently.
Edit: Though I'm not sure about it applying to losing the same ship again in a short span of time, rather than losing ANY ship again in a short span of time. Otherwise, a player can go through the different ships in his hangar before he has to worry about taking a major loss, and by the time he works back around to the first one, it might not cost him as much to lose.
[ This Message was edited by: Jim Starluck on 2009-10-12 02:37 ]
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2009-10-12 02:40
Quote:
|
On 2009-10-12 02:30, Jim Starluck wrote:
Edit: Though I'm not sure about it applying to losing the same ship again in a short span of time, rather than losing ANY ship again in a short span of time. Otherwise, a player can go through the different ships in his hangar before he has to worry about taking a major loss, and by the time he works back around to the first one, it might not cost him as much to lose.
[ This Message was edited by: Jim Starluck on 2009-10-12 02:37 ]
|
|
Fair point, probably better to just make it universal.
-Ent
_________________
|
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
| Posted: 2009-10-12 02:42
It could also mean that a player who starts off losing a Dread would want to move to successively smaller ships, so that the increase in res lost wouldn't be quite so high. Heck, it'd be an interesting way to encourage the use of smaller ships. 
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
Pegasus
Grand Admiral
Pitch Black
Joined: August 02, 2005
Posts: 434
From: Eleventh galaxy on the right!
| Posted: 2009-10-12 03:34
With an increase of more players this would appeal to encourage larger fleet battles. I like it.
_________________
Retired K'luth Combateer
|
Piotr-san
Chief Marshal
*Renegade Space Marines*
Joined: July 18, 2002
Posts: 385
From: Poland
| Posted: 2009-10-12 06:26
Quote:
|
Edit: Though I'm not sure about it applying to losing the same ship again in a short span of time, rather than losing ANY ship again in a short span of time. Otherwise, a player can go through the different ships in his hangar before he has to worry about taking a major loss, and by the time he works back around to the first one, it might not cost him as much to lose.
[ This Message was edited by: Jim Starluck on 2009-10-12 02:37 ]
|
|
Actually this could be good , forcing players to fly other hull size ships. If you lose for an example a dread you are forced to fly at least a 2 hull size lower ships e.g. destroyer if you dont want to incure a penalty.
_________________
* LobbyGhost votes [PB]Piotr-San for most likly to be Dems mom
Raptus regaliter
|
Airwolf^
Fleet Admiral
Joined: March 17, 2006
Posts: 16
| Posted: 2009-10-12 12:15
i like the idea, makes sense.
i ended up loosing alot of prestige back in the day through ship losses. but it still didnt stop me XD
_________________
|
Krim {C?}
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: June 24, 2002
Posts: 362
From: Boston MA
| Posted: 2009-10-12 12:30
I like the idea, I dont mind loosing anything besides a dread or station. Everything is is fine by me. But in my 8 car garage I have a station 4 dreads, 1 scout and 1 cruiser. I hardly ever "throw" ships away since I try to use my (somewhat) modded ships. Plus having to find a SY planet, with enough res to make a dread can be difficult at times.
_________________
"Universum est gelu quod atrum , nos es unus verus lux lucis"
GTN - Veneratio est Totus
|
Sops
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 07, 2004
Posts: 490
| Posted: 2009-10-12 12:41
Anything that promotes combat is good, I like this idea.
_________________
|
Bardiche
Chief Marshal
Joined: November 16, 2006
Posts: 1247
| Posted: 2009-10-12 12:45
I never care about what I lose, but it'd be nice to be penalised for it less.
_________________
|
*COMMANDERHAWK*
Chief Marshal
*Renegade Space Marines*
Joined: February 03, 2006
Posts: 260
From: Denver Colorado
| Posted: 2009-10-12 15:06
to be honest part of me would be happy to see this put in but the other part disagrees i think the pres loss atm is exactly where it should be if this was 483 then mabie i would be 100% with it bacause of how fast everyone died but things are a little more balanced now then back then and the thing about using smaller ships well the free play rules seem to be dealing with that seeing as how you can only use 1st rear ships and below if your not subed seeing alot of cruisers /dessies and frgs ect
_________________
plan A : dont die
plan B : take someone with you
|
Julian Delphiki
Admiral
Joined: June 19, 2002
Posts: 170
| Posted: 2009-10-12 19:30
I kind of agree with CHawk, but also like this idea as well..
If you compare prestige loss right now compared to .483, its almost nothing.. I'm much more willing to die right now than I was in 483 because the pres loss has been reduced so much.
_________________
|
Nightsabre
Marshal
Joined: February 21, 2005
Posts: 66
| Posted: 2009-10-12 23:56
I like this idea I was just thinking about this when I saw this. It would make combat more appealing for smaller fleets to engage larger ships and not have to worry about getting smoked.
_________________
|
Tommas [ USF HunnyBunny ]
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: February 04, 2006
Posts: 581
From: Norway
| Posted: 2009-10-13 09:53
Well i think the prestige loss is realy low as it is...not far away from 200prestige for an dread..so whats the real diffrence?
Darkspace today dont hold that many players on each server, maybe we can see battles of 4-5 ppl per side, then one die. This person wont come back to the battle because he is afraid of dying. Then the other side will crush them.
Or the guy that just died, comes back to battle, get abit shot at and will jump out instant. Realy just back to the old problem aint it? But it would be realy good if there where lots of ppl on ofc.
And what about the hardcore players? That just dont care about prestige and jump into battle just to have fun..some loses 5-6 ships in an instant! if u cary out this idea..those persons will be gone due to they will have no prestige left
The main issue about combat today is that when we die, our ship comes out of the shipyard with 5% hull..wich is realy boring..UGTO uses like 1 hour or more after each battle just to repair themself..ICC uses longer.
I think it would be bether to have some cinda spawn timer on a ship/spawning new ship, so if u die u cant use that dread for 10-60mins, but need to use another one..and after that penalty is gone, u can use the ship and the hull is back to 100%. This would get alot more combat due to u dont need to sit around a planet and repair yourself to boredom.
_________________
|
Nightsabre
Marshal
Joined: February 21, 2005
Posts: 66
| Posted: 2009-10-13 11:40
Quote:
|
On 2009-10-13 09:53, Tommas [ USF HunnyBunny ] wrote:
And what about the hardcore players? That just dont care about prestige and jump into battle just to have fun..some loses 5-6 ships in an instant! if u cary out this idea..those persons will be gone due to they will have no prestige left
|
|
Easy way to fix this. Have a cap, after say 4 ships you hit the max pres loss for all ships wich should be higher than it is currently but not so much that thoes that want to just have fun loose everything they got.
And I totally agree that it takes too long to repair. I think there should be something where if you compleatly leave a fighting zone for x min you should beable to get repaired faster. Otherwise the timer on a ship that has been destroyed would do about the same.
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
