| Author |
sag on ice |
Shigernafy
Admiral
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 5726
From: The Land of Taxation without Representation
|  Posted: 2011-05-25 06:31
I believe the planets were getting out of sync and causing a variety of building, defense, and planet smacking errors.
_________________
* [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.\"
|
SPaRTaN Z
Chief Marshal
Joined: June 26, 2009
Posts: 235
| Posted: 2011-05-25 07:57
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-25 06:31, Cave Johnson wrote:
I believe the planets were getting out of sync and causing a variety of building, defense, and planet smacking errors.
|
|
Does that mean those problems could be solved with the data replication system DS now uses?
[ This Message was edited by: *SPaRTaN Z* on 2011-05-25 08:15 ]
_________________
|
Tommas [ USF HunnyBunny ]
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: February 04, 2006
Posts: 581
From: Norway
| Posted: 2011-05-25 09:47
why go to the other servers? theres no one there, why? because u cant detect if anyone goes there.
Mv map is boring, if you replace it to the old 1.483 map it would be awsome.
_________________
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2011-05-25 14:36
actullly, what if planets advanced 100gu per day along their orbit? Updated when server resets.
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2011-05-25 14:56
Tell you what buddy, I'll make it easy. Really easy. Well the idea was easy, implementing it will suck.
The fact is, and has been for a while now, planets are meaningless. The goal, oh the goal, of course, is to capture all the planets, but why the hell would you?
Infact, why the hell would you capture anything beyond getting Gold Transport? The answer is: Combat.
You know what people attack planets? To get combat. And any planet will do, and the rule of The Law of Least Resistence wins this one. Luyten gets fought over every day because its easy to get to for all three factions, and its balanced enough that all three factions have a good opportunity to fight.
And thats what it really is about now, just fighting. Lets have an excuse to fight each other, not that you need one. All you need is a red diamond on the map and bingo.
And thats your real problem. People go to Sagi because its easy to find things to shoot at. That simple. Really. You can try and move it another server, or another system, but the fact is, its so much easier for every faction to find something to shoot at in one place. People complain, but they won't try to fix it because no one will follow for any decent period of time.
Can you see ICC AND Kluth holding the UGTO homeserver hostage for any respecatble time? Nope. Don't count on it. Not to mention that actually seeing ships in other systems is impossible. Your logic is sound up to the point where reality dropkicks it in the face and makes it perfectly clear that it hasn't happened because it doesn't obey the Law of Least Resistence.
Ultimately, the problem, at the very core of everything, is the fact that planets just are plain meaningless. You don't have to move anything arond really. You don't have to add planets, or remove them. You don't have to delete systems or add them or change jump direction. You need to give meaning to planets in the first place.
I really have to emphasize this point. Fighting over planets isn't really fighting over planets right now, its basically using planets as a magnet to find something to shoot at. You want people to capture other planets? Give them a damn well good reason to.
You want players to actually capture a system? Give them a reason to.
You can say there exists one already, but you are wrong. So obliviously wrong if you think so. You know what matters? One terran planet that can hold a shipyard. Thats it.
After that, every other planet held is just a place to grab something to shoot at potentially, and since its easiet to find it in the same old systems, why change?
Make it change. Make systems lock down when you capture them. Make capturing planets a longer process with bigger bonuses. Make special gadget modding that lets people build good ships (and get rid of ridiculous 5% hull ships). Replace a tired old model with a new one that makes every planet worth having. Make it so that fleets will actually want to capture planets not just for giggles but because of the rewards it brings. Hint: There isn't one right now.
You want to give people a reason to go out and fight somewhere else? You need something more than a witty rant that doesn't begin to grasp the player mindset that they don't give a damn about scenery, they care about the reasons for where they are, when they are. And if you Developers can't seem to grasp for a single second that planets are utterly pointless beyond being a magnet for combat right now, you don't get thats why people fight in the same place, but get bored. And even though they're bored, they know thats where the combat is. Want to change it?
The world begins with you. You design the mechanics. You determine how the playerbase thinks. Its all about the goal and the reward, and believe it or not, you have control over that. Its not one simple suggestion, because one simple suggestion won't work, thats just a bad way to approach it. Don't sit there and expect the playerbase to do the work for you and make the game fun for themselves, they'll just do what makes them the richest in whatever they're striving for, whether its prestige or kills.
It sure as hell isn't planets captured.
-Ent
_________________
|
Fatal Perihelion
Chief Marshal
Fatal Squadron
Joined: April 15, 2010
Posts: 308
| Posted: 2011-05-25 16:00
I guess you are not serious with "shut down the MV" but i totaly agree with you, Scenario had its special way with building, mining, brawling and then its over and a new map would come.
I think for new players a crowded Scenario is very nice, i wonder if new players just leave as they got the impression the game is dead: the Scenario empty and the MV, huge and almost deserted.
Shutting down the MV and forcing people to play Scenario would be interesting ,lol. But there are too many players which dont like Scenario at all.
Scenario was great but planets were still just secondary to win the map in the end. And even without the SY/Res patch, mutual agreements were needed to let people build sy. A few tranny rushers or bomby bombers could spoil any scenario and they did, newbies cause they didnt know better or vets cause they wanted to be bad.
But i agree, Scenario was often big fun, maybe a little small now when you got used to the MV. But the Golden Age ? For me yes, but many will say the golden age was way before.
When Scenario was that much fun, we had the problem that the small playerbase was spiltted and MV was dieing off.
[ This Message was edited by: Fatal Perihelion on 2011-05-25 16:19 ]
_________________
|
CBR{DTB}
Grand Admiral
Joined: November 22, 2010
Posts: 50
From: USA
| Posted: 2011-05-25 17:30
make some systems like luygten , cinn ,tau, and eri smaller so that when a faction has captured the small amount of planets they can move onto the next system.
_________________
Since 2010...
|
Silent Threat { Vier }
Marshal
Anarchy's End
Joined: August 03, 2004
Posts: 278
From: Waiting...watching...
| Posted: 2011-05-25 17:59
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-25 17:30, Cbr (ICC) wrote:
make some systems like luygten , cinn ,tau, and eri smaller so that when a faction has captured the small amount of planets they can move onto the next system.
|
|
Was just thinking along the same lines. I used to think that I wanted the systems to be big, that bigger was better. Then I got to thinking that what I liked about the old huge MV maps was that there were so many systems. The front line kept changing as factions advanced across systems or fell back. When you logged in you never knew where the frontline was going to be and often enough there was more than one.
So my thought is is instead of a few systems with many planets, maybe we could try many systems with a few planets. Possibly even as low as 3 or 4 planets per system. This way entire systems could change hands often enough instead of just a couple planets, the front line would shift often, AND as Ent was saying planets would become more important as each faction would want to keep building shipyards as they advance along so that thier people can spawn close to the front.
Also this would cause more gate battles which I have always enjoyed. There is a certain thrill when rushing through gates with a fleet when you know that the enemy is ready and waiting right on the other side : ) This causes battles AWAY from planets. Also gate battles makes teamwork quite important.
Keep some of the systems close so that wormholing in become a strategic option. Use enough but not too many gates.
This would change the way the MV is played without changing that game. It would be something different.
My thoughts.
[ This Message was edited by: Silent Threat { Vier } on 2011-05-25 18:00 ]
_________________
|
Animyx
Chief Marshal
Army Of Darkness
Joined: December 08, 2008
Posts: 108
From: Ground Zero
| Posted: 2011-05-25 19:03
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-25 14:36, Defiance*XO* wrote:
actullly, what if planets advanced 100gu per day along their orbit? Updated when server resets.
|
|
genious! this would add a lot more diversity in defending planets, one day its one side of the sun, 5 days later its on the opposite side (exaggeration but ya know what i mean)... nice idea
_________________
Lock 'N' Load
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2011-05-25 21:43
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-25 14:56, Enterprise wrote:
The fact is, and has been for a while now, planets are meaningless. The goal, oh the goal, of course, is to capture all the planets, but why the hell would you?
Infact, why the hell would you capture anything beyond getting Gold Transport? The answer is: Combat.
|
|
I have to agree with Ent. Planets need to mean something more for the entire system or server.
Right now, planets serve as SYs and Depots. And that's it. All a faction has to do is put an SY in a system, defend it like hell and they're all set. Ditto the depot planet.
You can spawn any ship you want from your garage. Even if you have one last SY planet left on that one last system in the server, your faction or fleet can spawn whatever they want from their garage and then retake everything once the enemy have logged.
Planets don't matter. System ownership is just a matter of faction or fleet ego.
- UGTO regularly owns 3 out of 5 systems and are happy placing depots and SYs on their clusters. Then they sit there and wait for someone to come attack their depots/SYs for action and pres. Why do they wanna hold Luyt? Because it's right next to Kluth and ICC. They're guaranteed action when the other two come a-knockin' for some bangin'....
- Kluth are not really interested in planets, they just want combat, they just want to kill. Losing a few planets in Eri doesn't bother them because it simply means a target rich environment near home. They don't have to travel far to gain pres.
- ICC.... I don't know what the hell IQQ are doing these days, so I can't say much.
I've said it some time back. Planets need to affect your ability to spawn ships in the system.
Let me repeat that: Planets need to affect your ability to spawn ships in the system.
No one cares. No one tries, because they already have their big shiny toys in the garage. And because "I worked hard to get to this rank so I should be able to spawn whatever ships I want", planets don't matter.
Understand so far?
No? Let me make it simpler for you. I'll propose this.
Just like each planet has control points, I think that each faction needs to have some kind of points system that determines the biggest ship that they can spawn. And this should be directly related to the number and type of planets that they own in the server.
Different planets will have different values attached to them, and building SYs on this planet will accumulate points that determine the type of ships you can spawn in the server, regardless of what the hell is in your garage.
If you control 3 systems with 5 terran planets with SYs on them ("tarran" for those of you who can't spell) then you probably should have enough control points to spawn stations.
If you don't even fully control a single system, but have only 4 planets left on that server, with only one of them having an SY, the biggest ship you can spawn in that system would be a cruiser.
If you want a station, get it from your home server (Lacerta, Cassiopeia or Andromeda).
Now tell me, if that happened, would you consider planet ownership important?
[ This Message was edited by: Kenny_Naboo[+R] on 2011-05-25 21:46 ]
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Lark of Serenity
Grand Admiral
Raven Warriors
Joined: June 02, 2002
Posts: 2516
| Posted: 2011-05-25 23:41
solutions:
1. harder and more meaningful planet captures
make capturing systems and planets very difficult and very meaningful. if i log off and the next day all the work i did is undone whats the motivation? the only reason planets get capped anymore is to pick a fight, its a "hey im over here" declaration.
5 years ago the fact that ICC broke out of its home systems and fought all the way to sag was HUGE news. now no one would bat an eye.
make planets take a very coordinated fleet action to take. maybe something like those progressive assault missions in FPS', randomly generate a list of actions to be taken for each planet when a fleet gets into its zone of control. e.g. bomb this, land here, blockade for X amount of time, cannot be taken before taking planet X, etc. etc.
make planets give buffs to a faction inside the system. make system control give buffs to the faction in the whole MV. make it something worthwhile. an enhancement factory space station, a trickle of credits to all fleeted faction players, etc.
2. easier and less meaningful planet captures
cut planets from systems, make the remaining ones absurdly easy to capture. the result will be front lines in dramatic fluxuation. problem solved
3. a mix?
make planets progressively harder to capture the fewer players are on a faction. less "everyone on kluth is asleep. lets capture all their stuff" nightly raids that set back anything the kluth did during the day.
_________________
Admiral Larky, The Wolf
Don't play with fire, play with Larky.
Raven Division Command - 1st Division
|
Tommas [ USF HunnyBunny ]
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: February 04, 2006
Posts: 581
From: Norway
| Posted: 2011-05-25 23:57
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-25 17:59, Silent Threat { Vier } wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-25 17:30, Cbr (ICC) wrote:
make some systems like luygten , cinn ,tau, and eri smaller so that when a faction has captured the small amount of planets they can move onto the next system.
|
|
Was just thinking along the same lines. I used to think that I wanted the systems to be big, that bigger was better.
[ This Message was edited by: Silent Threat { Vier } on 2011-05-25 18:00 ]
|
|
Oh we both know bigger is better! 
_________________
|
SpaceAdmiral
Grand Admiral
Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 1005
| Posted: 2011-05-26 01:23
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-25 21:43, Kenny_Naboo[+R] wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-25 14:56, Enterprise wrote:
The fact is, and has been for a while now, planets are meaningless. The goal, oh the goal, of course, is to capture all the planets, but why the hell would you?
Infact, why the hell would you capture anything beyond getting Gold Transport? The answer is: Combat.
|
|
I have to agree with Ent. Planets need to mean something more for the entire system or server.
Right now, planets serve as SYs and Depots. And that's it. All a faction has to do is put an SY in a system, defend it like hell and they're all set. Ditto the depot planet.
You can spawn any ship you want from your garage. Even if you have one last SY planet left on that one last system in the server, your faction or fleet can spawn whatever they want from their garage and then retake everything once the enemy have logged.
Planets don't matter. System ownership is just a matter of faction or fleet ego.
- UGTO regularly owns 3 out of 5 systems and are happy placing depots and SYs on their clusters. Then they sit there and wait for someone to come attack their depots/SYs for action and pres. Why do they wanna hold Luyt? Because it's right next to Kluth and ICC. They're guaranteed action when the other two come a-knockin' for some bangin'....
- Kluth are not really interested in planets, they just want combat, they just want to kill. Losing a few planets in Eri doesn't bother them because it simply means a target rich environment near home. They don't have to travel far to gain pres.
- ICC.... I don't know what the hell IQQ are doing these days, so I can't say much.
I've said it some time back. Planets need to affect your ability to spawn ships in the system.
Let me repeat that: Planets need to affect your ability to spawn ships in the system.
No one cares. No one tries, because they already have their big shiny toys in the garage. And because "I worked hard to get to this rank so I should be able to spawn whatever ships I want", planets don't matter.
Understand so far?
No? Let me make it simpler for you. I'll propose this.
Just like each planet has control points, I think that each faction needs to have some kind of points system that determines the biggest ship that they can spawn. And this should be directly related to the number and type of planets that they own in the server.
Different planets will have different values attached to them, and building SYs on this planet will accumulate points that determine the type of ships you can spawn in the server, regardless of what the hell is in your garage.
If you control 3 systems with 5 terran planets with SYs on them ("tarran" for those of you who can't spell) then you probably should have enough control points to spawn stations.
If you don't even fully control a single system, but have only 4 planets left on that server, with only one of them having an SY, the biggest ship you can spawn in that system would be a cruiser.
If you want a station, get it from your home server (Lacerta, Cassiopeia or Andromeda).
Now tell me, if that happened, would you consider planet ownership important?
[ This Message was edited by: Kenny_Naboo[+R] on 2011-05-25 21:46 ]
|
|
While this would add tremendous value to planets, it would easily cause a tilt effect.
Example:
UGTO captures 3 systems and has access to stations. Kluth has 1 and ICC has 1.5 (Kaus hardly has any planets). UGTO launches a major offensive while most ICC are away and take half of Tau Ceti. If Kluth also took a few planets then ICC would be stuck with cruisers/destroyers trying to defend the remaining parts of the system. Since ICC has efficient cruisers, this might not hurt them too much, but imagine a Kluth fighting force without dreads.
While you can spawn them from home systems, a dedicated attack fleet which takes many planets with suprise will dominate any reinforcements from home servers (Read: Gate Camping), especially if they have converted a captured planet into a depo/inf planet. The only balance would be for the 3rd faction to start ninja'ing the dominating faction's planets, but this is not guaranteed.
I do agree planets need much, much more value but I don't like giving a winning faction a tilt effect.
_________________
|
Azure Prower
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 14, 2006
Posts: 309
| Posted: 2011-05-26 03:08
Most of you are forgetting that the Dev team are volunteers and that major upgrades aren't really on the table.
That being said. Here's my pictures showing the problem that is current occurring.
ICC has no where to go but Luyten.
Kaus is MI controlled and the MI will nuke any planet in the system as soon as you log off, making it indefensible.
Eri is K'luth home game system and would be fiercely defended.
K'luth can chose to go to either Luyten or R33. Yet they chose to goto Tau Ceti because that's usually where the UGTO meets the ICC.
As soon as K'luth move in on R33, ICC moves in on Eri.
If K'luth moves in on Luyten, they are stepping on ICC's toes. Leading the ICC and K'luth to fight while the UGTO wait to move in to finish them both off. Thus UGTO retakes Luyten again.
Leading to basically this:
My suggestions for a more dynamic map:
-Put Kaus in between Tau Ceti and Episilon Eri.
-Although ICC and UGTO home gate systems are next to each other, both UGTO and ICC have a choice of where to advance - or if they chose to - advance each other directly.
-K'luth being in the position of how UGTO currently are by being further away from the other factions, they don't have to advantage UGTO currently has by having a direct route to Luyten.
-K'luth can use Kaus as a 'by pass' system to get to Luyten or Tau Ceti. As K'luth are less dependent on planets and are in direct confrontation with the MI.
-The main confrontation system between UGTO and K'luth will be R33.
-In Luyten, place the gates from Tau Ceti and R33 close to each other so that ICC can easily access R33 if they so wish.
[ This Message was edited by: Azure Prower on 2011-05-26 03:10 ]
_________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/AzurePrower
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2011-05-26 03:19
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-26 01:23, SpaceAdmiral wrote:
While this would add tremendous value to planets, it would easily cause a tilt effect.
Example:
UGTO captures 3 systems and has access to stations. Kluth has 1 and ICC has 1.5 (Kaus hardly has any planets). UGTO launches a major offensive while most ICC are away and take half of Tau Ceti. If Kluth also took a few planets then ICC would be stuck with cruisers/destroyers trying to defend the remaining parts of the system. Since ICC has efficient cruisers, this might not hurt them too much, but imagine a Kluth fighting force without dreads.
While you can spawn them from home systems, a dedicated attack fleet which takes many planets with suprise will dominate any reinforcements from home servers (Read: Gate Camping), especially if they have converted a captured planet into a depo/inf planet. The only balance would be for the 3rd faction to start ninja'ing the dominating faction's planets, but this is not guaranteed.
I do agree planets need much, much more value but I don't like giving a winning faction a tilt effect.
|
|
What Larky just said here:
Quote:
|
3. a mix?
make planets progressively harder to capture the fewer players are on a faction. less "everyone on kluth is asleep. lets capture all their stuff" nightly raids that set back anything the kluth did during the day.
|
|
Either by making planets stronger, or AI more numerous.
As for the tilt effect, it's inevitable. But there it is.... you know what to do. You'll have to fight tooth and nails over those rocks.
The tilt effect will probably be lessened once the Devs fix the depot issue. We all know how invincible UGTO can be right now if they have lotsa planets, depots especially, and spam shrooms (Their usual tactic when all else fails).
Once depots are nicely "fixed", UGTO having stations, and the other side having only cruisers or dreads won't be a problem as tanking or planet hugging won't have that much of an effect.
Beside the number and type of planets owned determining the largest ship you can spawn, there is another way to make use of points.
Think of games like Battlefield, where every flag or planet yields the faction Control Points. And spawning a ship will consume control points, depending on size and class. Once that ship gets destroyed or docked, the control points are returned to the pool again.
So instead of say having no stations available because you only have 2 SYs, you could spawn a station, but at the cost of the other players not being able to spawn dreads because you ate up the available control points.
[ This Message was edited by: Kenny_Naboo[+R] on 2011-05-26 03:31 ]
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
