Topic: New Dyna...What Say You?

[Vorcha]

Heya,

I've been talking to my fellow GSA freaks and think I've come up w/ a way to combine what they like w/ what Dyna freaks like  .

GSA pilots live for individual and team combat and don't generally play much Dyna as they find flipping hexes and accruing points tedious.

Dyna Pilots live for campaigns where pvp combat is random and the thrill of victory is through coordinated assault and counter-assault towards strategic goals.

I personally like both sides of the coin, and have been thinking long and hard about creating a campaign that changes the dynamics a bit.  As a relative newbie to Dyna (only played a few), I figured I?d best air my idea here to see if there is an interest?.

The problems I see w/ Dyna are as follows:

1.   Fleets w/ people who can spend 24/7 online playing usually win.
2.   Guys who CAN?T spend a massive amount of time online usually get left behind (i.e. smaller ships, and lower prestige points ? playing AI missions)
3.   Even though each side has a leader, they lead by diplomacy, rather than the true military doctrine.
4.   Players ships are all usually of the same class so pvp battles are similar in nature to GSA ladder matches?EXCEPT if you catch newbies or other peeps in smaller ships.
5.   Hexes w/ high defensive values are sooooooooooo tedious to flip.
6.   Players who die in battle can usually buy another ship equal to or better than the one they lost (if they have enough prestige points) My point?.a player who lives online may have 200,000 points and he/she really doesn?t care if they lose a ship or battle as they simply buy a new one.
7.   Modem players are limited in that it takes hours to download many of the mods for dynas?then hours more for each subsequent patch.

How about this to address some or all of these issues:

1.   Create a campaign that has a set time frame?instead of 24/7.  As example it will run from 7 am to 9 pm 3-days a week.  This allows peeps to better schedule their time to get more guys interested in the campaign?and prevents peeps from playing dyna 24/7.  These times would have to rotate so that everyone has a chance to get on the server.
           a.   Advantages are that the database could be cleaned and kept at optimal efficiency.
           b.   Dynamic changes to the ship lists ? fighter lists could be coordinated on a server activation basis.
2.   Have campaign admins on anytime the server is up.  They would be tasked w/ issuing fleet communications to the person in charge of each fleet.
           a.   Example:  I would tell fed admiral in charge that federation intelligence has picked up information indicating a probable attack on our advanced fleet shipyards at Kitomer, location 22,10 within 15 real life minutes.  I would tell the Fed Admiral to dispatch up to 3 pilots to these coordinates to prevent the attack.  The fed admiral could pick anyone he wanted to defend this area.  If successful, the federation will gain a 10% gain in engine output in CL production the next server cycle.  To defend this location he could decide on a preemptive strike?.a snare at the border for the assault, or by simply waiting on the target hex for the attack?whatever he likes.

At the same time my counter-part would be telling the Klingon Admiral that Klink intelligence has determined the location of the Federation Kitomer advanced shipyards at 22,10.  He would order them to assemble an assault team of up to 3 ships to attack and destroy these yards within 15 real life minutes.  If victorious, the Klingon?s will gain a 10% gain in engine out-put in CL production the next server cycle.
      
The admins would be tasked with forcing each side to play as many pvp battles as possible, and would add the dynamic that each person in charge would have to hand pick and send pilots on missions.  Example of what a fleet admiral would need to consider:  Do I send my one Battle Cruiser w/ 2 Light Cruiser?s on this mission or do I send 3 CL?s?  How important is this mission??.Is this mission important enough to tie up a BC??.With these pilots busy in mission?what happens if I get another mission that I know needs a BC?  What do I have to defend my left flank while these guys are away on mission? Etc.

Admins would not be on anyone?s side?they?re sole purpose would be to force feed battle missions to each side to increase the enjoyment of Dyna.

3.   With each server start-up battles won dynamically change individual ship class specs or enhance a class of ships.  (i.e. battles won award the winners better ship systems or enhancements.)
            a.   This of course would require download of new ship lists and fighter lists before each start-up, but I?ve already written an installer that takes 2 minutes by modem to download?so I?m hoping this isn?t a big prob.
4.   To help the modem users?.limit the campaign to stock op ship lists or at the most OP 3.3 (as most have this already).  Then as each side wins or loses battles?all the modem player needs to download is ship and fighter lists w/ the installer (2 minutes)
            a.   Down the road we can open it up to radical mods using TNG or other?s currently in development
5.   Keep the campaign duration short?so that peeps w/ lives can play and live.
            a.   It?s very easy to arrange time a few days a week for a few weeks?rather than 24/7 for weeks on end.

What we?ve done so far:

1.   Modified the stock OP ship and fighter lists to ?balance? each race without regard to normal Star Fleet Battle doctrine.
            a.   See http://www.lazerlaw.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=2&t=4229
2.   Created a map that has a few areas of easy movement ? low defensive values between races bordered by areas of neutral space with massive def values and high movement costs.
             a.   This I?m hoping won?t limit movement?but will force hex flipping to narrow corridors between races.  I.e. if the admirals want to launch an offensive on their own?they?ll have to do it thru one of these 3 corridors.  Deep striking and mission striking however?can easily be sent thru the neutral hexes.
3.   Begun creating the server campaign using the info posted on this website.
             a.   Missions and server rules etc.
4.   Have successfully activated the campaign as a flat file?.unfortunately..I?m not having much luck w/ Sql server. L

What needs to be done:

1.   Admins need to be selected.
         a.   To dole out the missions to each side for pvp battles.
         b.   I have 3 or 4 of us ready to serve?will need more to help cover the entire server up time.
2.   Fleet Admirals and other people need to be selected / volunteer.
         a.   I would say 1 person in charge w/ a cadre of other guys who are dependable to help when the head person in charge isn?t online.
         b.   You guys would be the chess master?deciding who goes where and fights what battle.
3.   Someone with more experience than me to host the server and set-up other normal support files
         a.   I.e. Web maps etc?basically someone to make sure I don?t screw the damn thing up  .
         b.   I?ve had it up and running but I don?t want to get everyone excited then watch the thing crash due to my stupidity J
4.   Set up predefined battles and objectives with rewards and outcomes for each side.
         a.   Suggest forming a group of 3 or 4 guys (admins) to help plan this out a bit for item 4 5 and 6.
5.   Set up the actual ultimate goal of the campaign
         a.   I.e.?completely conquer or a group of planets etc.
6.  Build a web site w/ the rules and conditions.

That?s it guys?I?ve spoken to many in GSA and they?re more than interested?what say you guys over here?

Any volunteers to help? 

V

Contact me at
ICQ @ 276-096-244
RFA Fleet Message
Or thru these forums
 To discuss this further and or volunteer.

[FPF-DieHard]

Have you played on the General War servers?   These might be close to what you are looking for.   The KHH guys are GSA players and they love it.

[Hexx]

Actually (and no offence intended) this sounds like a D2 designed for what GSA players like (PvP set ships) and not really including anything (that I saw) for what D2 players like.
Some of our D2 players aren't that great at PvP (me) or don't have stable connections . Many of them feel they contribute by flipping hexes as necessary during the campaigns.
Some of our D2 players live all over the world, not sre how they'd respond to a (for example) 7am- 9pm (EST I assume)  campaign 3 days a week. It would work for some, not for others.

Feel free to set up such a server of course, I'm sure many of the D2 players will stop in, but why not try some of our campaigns as well -as DH said the KHH seemed to like GW2, maybe you guys can pop in for GW3.

The nice thing about the GW series is that with only 3 races participating on a server, and with a smaller map, you get alot more PvP, plus the hexes o GW aren't usually set that high (20 max I think) .

[Vorcha]

Lol no worries Hexx.  This would be up to the fleet admiral to determine the pvp matches.  For those who don't like them, he could always do the normal offensive kind of thing (flipping hexes) which is very useful in keep the opponents tied down defending hexes (pun intended lol)

As to times...they would rotate...so all is fair.

Yes Diehard, I will be playing GW for sure....Doc Azteca speaks kindly of the campaign  

Thanks for the input guys

[KHH Jakle]

Generally, Vorcha's intent does seem to make a D2 that is more palatable to the average GSA player.

 I would add that GW is popular with KHH because it is based on OP+/SFB with historical alliances and it has a high rate of PvP action.  You'll note that we are absent from all others.

I find the statement that this idea is soley designed for the GSA players and not what D2 players like kind of silly - I mean, it's a D2.  Isn't THAT what's in it for the D2 players?

Vorcha - I had thought about limited window D2's (where it is only up for certain hours of the day) and kind of like the idea.  I was much more stringent about the window though, like 7pm - 12 pm daily.  I am sure that would be blasphemy in here, but in my mind that eliminates undesireable aspects of organized D2 play (like making big gains against opponents during the hours when they are not strongly represented).

[Vorcha]

Aye agreed....the Dyna's I've played had a contingent of guys who stayed on 24/7 racking up massive p points and doing considerable map changes compared to those that could only get on 3 to 4 hours a day / night.  Basically if a fleet or race had enough of these guys...they could almost assure themselves a victory.

Thanks for the comments bud...

Keep em coming folks

V

[Cleaven]

Okay, I'm confused. How do the admins assign the missions? I have a good understanding of how drafting works and how the D2 generates missions for players to take, but I don't see how those missions can be assigned by an admin via the OP player client (even with a greatly enhanced SQL server kit).

Also admirals can't lead while they are fighting in their cruiser, and can't fight very well while trying to lead/give orders. In this way being a leader takes away from playing the game (fighting a starship). Another problem is that players have got to want to be led, and if they think their orders are screwy and want to go in the other direction, you can't stop them. Unfortunately the D2 we have is sadly lacking in key respects for what you want to do with it.

[Mog]

Generally, Vorcha's intent does seem to make a D2 that is more palatable to the average GSA player.

 I would add that GW is popular with KHH because it is based on OP+/SFB with historical alliances and it has a high rate of PvP action.  You'll note that we are absent from all others.

I find the statement that this idea is soley designed for the GSA players and not what D2 players like kind of silly - I mean, it's a D2.  Isn't THAT what's in it for the D2 players?

Vorcha - I had thought about limited window D2's (where it is only up for certain hours of the day) and kind of like the idea.  I was much more stringent about the window though, like 7pm - 12 pm daily.  I am sure that would be blasphemy in here, but in my mind that eliminates undesireable aspects of organized D2 play (like making big gains against opponents during the hours when they are not strongly represented).

It also eliminates all non-US players.

[Hexx]

Generally, Vorcha's intent does seem to make a D2 that is more palatable to the average GSA player.

 I would add that GW is popular with KHH because it is based on OP+/SFB with historical alliances and it has a high rate of PvP action.  You'll note that we are absent from all others.

I find the statement that this idea is soley designed for the GSA players and not what D2 players like kind of silly - I mean, it's a D2.  Isn't THAT what's in it for the D2 players?

Vorcha - I had thought about limited window D2's (where it is only up for certain hours of the day) and kind of like the idea.  I was much more stringent about the window though, like 7pm - 12 pm daily.  I am sure that would be blasphemy in here, but in my mind that eliminates undesireable aspects of organized D2 play (like making big gains against opponents during the hours when they are not strongly represented).

It also eliminates all non-US players.

I was trying to make that point to support you Mog... but you seem to have forgotten about us Canadians so maybe ya deserve not to play... 

[Mog]

My bad, i should have said North American dwellers.

One to your side

[Julin Eurthyr]

My thoughts:

It is not 100% guaranteed that a 6 pack of players (3 from each side) are going to be drafted in order to fight the battle.  Admiral sends BCH and 2 CLs, D2's drafting only sends the drafting BCH into a 3 on 1...  BCH loses objective, if not life.
That, in and of itself, defeats the purpose of trying to use the D2 to fight "set piece" battles.

Now, while the concept of "limited time" servers sounds appealing on the surface, I remember my times on second and third shift, facing off against the Brits / Aussies / day crews of the galaxy.  Rotating the server times so each shift gets a day or 2 a week to play sounds confusing and somewhat restrictive.  Especially on those days/times that certain races aren't around to play...  Don't forget that even Americans (whether of US, Canadian or Mexican persuasion) work more shifts that traditional 9-5 Mon-Fri...

I'd rather see OOBs where casual players are rewarded with the special ships, say 75-90% of the OOB ships are assigned to players who play 20-40 hours a week, instead of the current nutters get first crack at OOB ships as they make the biggest impact.  Or a system where ships cost a fixed percentage of a player's PP (that BB costs a player 100% of their current PP, whether that's 2000 or 200,000 PP, while DNs cost 85-90%, BCHs cost 75%, CAs cost 50% etc, with certain casual-player acceptable minimums so everyone can get a shot at the big ships, ie, you need 50,000 PP to even bid on a BB...

Combine that with limited-time oriented objectives (fight and win X many PvP battles in hex XX,XX over a 3 hour span) in order to win your side an advantage / VC, both sides have the same timeframe to complete the battles in the same spot so they are encouraged to get over there and fight.  If the target hex's DV changes a certain amount in that timeframe, to represent the fact that one side declined battle, the side that acted there would win the objective.

[Vorcha]

Wow...excellent Julian.  I have play tested these and can set the system up to "hopefully" award the right type of battle in the target hex (planet assault, base assault, patrol etrc) but your right..it's not 100% guaranteed.  The 3 hour (or whatever) time in the area sounds like a decent solution.  As to drafting again you are absolutely correct, but one thing to consider is that even though drafting isn't always 100%....neither is war.  This could easily represent a type of "fog of war" aspect to the game.  The players could always disengage, reform and attack again...maybe this time swinging the battle in their favor....a time limit to the battle is the key.  Another thing to remember is that the fleet admirals don't know how many peeps - ships are being sent by the opposing force....one side might send 3...the other 1....again the fog of war aspect rears it's ugly head

Cleven good points, As to peeps not listening to the fleet admirals...by no means would this be a dictatorship, I've played enough Dyna's and pvp matches where I really don't think this would be a prob.  I don't know anyone in this community that doesn't relish pvp combat...many times no matter the odds....something challenging is usually the most fun battle.  If someone doesn't want pvp matches...they don't need to take any...just inform the guys in charge and work on flipping hexes....yes D2 is lacking, but the human side of the game more than makes up for it's weakness.  Also, you don't need to worry about fleet admirals not getting in and playing / fighting....they will believe me.  While they are away either off line or in battle someone else can handle the reins...also remeber team chat / team speak servers...this easily compensates for most communication issues.  In RDSL Krueg often talked to the fleet while in battle and he did pretty well.

Again...great comments.  Keep them comin guys.  V 

[Lepton]

Boowa!!  My eyes glazed over after awhile there.  People sh** a brick around here if you suggest a limited time server.  I've made such arguements and have been overwhelmingly shouted down.  In my estimation the best fix to the D2 is to rip it out by the roots and salt the earth it grows in.  GSA-based campaigns are the only way to go as far as I can see.  I have made my suggestion in the past. If it doesn't fit people's narrow definition of a D2 campaign that either tweeks shiplists, victory conditions, alliances, etc. , people aren't interesred.  Good luck.  Whatever system you are proposing needs to be a simple or automated as possible if you expect to get people on board.  Downloads, bad.  Mindlessly blowing up AI, good.  End of story.

[Julin Eurthyr]

Boowa!!  My eyes glazed over after awhile there.  People sh** a brick around here if you suggest a limited time server.  I've made such arguements and have been overwhelmingly shouted down.  In my estimation the best fix to the D2 is to rip it out by the roots and salt the earth it grows in.  GSA-based campaigns are the only way to go as far as I can see.  I have made my suggestion in the past. If it doesn't fit people's narrow definition of a D2 campaign that either tweeks shiplists, victory conditions, alliances, etc. , people aren't interesred.  Good luck.  Whatever system you are proposing needs to be a simple or automated as possible if you expect to get people on board.  Downloads, bad.  Mindlessly blowing up AI, good.  End of story.

It's not that people aren't interested.

I am a father and work.  At times, I worked "odd" shifts, like overnights (midnight - 8:30 AM) or 4x10 hour weeks (2:30 pm - 1 am, including Sat. nights).  I am also not the only parent or person employed outside of "banker's hours".

I would look forward to shipping my kids off to school then playing for an hour or 2 on my day off before my kids came home from school.  Imagine if the schedule were set up so that when I had the chance to play, the server was closed.  When I was occupied (watching my children / at work), the server was open.  Lilke many parents in the community, I have to schedule play-time around my family responsibilities.

Scratch one ISC A/RM from the campaign.  And if all servers used the same schedule, I would effectively be out of the game.

While definitely losing one player doesn't sound like much, how many other players would we lose due to the schedule?  Many times we (D2 forum) have had this discussion, and many times we would be looking at losing 50% of the playerbase.  Even back in the days when we had a few thousand players...

Lepton, your dislike of the current D2 is well known.  We have also recommended you design a GSA-based campaign that fits your wishes, as people who have played the D2, many since it's release, know the current system (which is also quite likely to be the only system we have), is unsuitable for your tastes.  How goes your planning on this project?

[Cleaven]

I still don't understand how you expect to assign missions without some serious cracking of the OP D2 player client.

[Vorcha]

Julian,

I agree w/ your comments on the hours....luckily I have 2 buds who basically are on 24/7 and they've both said they'd be happy to man the server any times we wish it to be up....so rotating the server isn't a big deal from that perspective at all.  One is in the UK and the other in the USA.  Like you I am a father of 3 who does 10 to 14 hour days depending on load...no worries mate.

Cleven it's simple bro....lets say I tell the fed Admiral that he needs to attack a planet or patrol a series of hexes over a given time frame....he does just that and accepts only missions that meet that criteria (the server can be set up so that there are no or little mandatory missions)...alllowing everyone the chance to dance a bit.  I've play tested it and it works bud...if I get to hex xyz and it doesn't have the mission I need...I back out and re-enter -or- if I (we) are drafted into a non-mission specific battle then I can elect to bail and try to re-aquire the mission or go ahead and play the non-mission specfic battle....nothings locked in stone.....the only thing the system encourages is pvp play.

V 

[Lepton]

Boowa!!  My eyes glazed over after awhile there.  People sh** a brick around here if you suggest a limited time server.  I've made such arguements and have been overwhelmingly shouted down.  In my estimation the best fix to the D2 is to rip it out by the roots and salt the earth it grows in.  GSA-based campaigns are the only way to go as far as I can see.  I have made my suggestion in the past. If it doesn't fit people's narrow definition of a D2 campaign that either tweeks shiplists, victory conditions, alliances, etc. , people aren't interesred.  Good luck.  Whatever system you are proposing needs to be a simple or automated as possible if you expect to get people on board.  Downloads, bad.  Mindlessly blowing up AI, good.  End of story.

It's not that people aren't interested.

I am a father and work.  At times, I worked "odd" shifts, like overnights (midnight - 8:30 AM) or 4x10 hour weeks (2:30 pm - 1 am, including Sat. nights).  I am also not the only parent or person employed outside of "banker's hours".

I would look forward to shipping my kids off to school then playing for an hour or 2 on my day off before my kids came home from school.  Imagine if the schedule were set up so that when I had the chance to play, the server was closed.  When I was occupied (watching my children / at work), the server was open.  Lilke many parents in the community, I have to schedule play-time around my family responsibilities.

Scratch one ISC A/RM from the campaign.  And if all servers used the same schedule, I would effectively be out of the game.

While definitely losing one player doesn't sound like much, how many other players would we lose due to the schedule?  Many times we (D2 forum) have had this discussion, and many times we would be looking at losing 50% of the playerbase.  Even back in the days when we had a few thousand players...

Lepton, your dislike of the current D2 is well known.  We have also recommended you design a GSA-based campaign that fits your wishes, as people who have played the D2, many since it's release, know the current system (which is also quite likely to be the only system we have), is unsuitable for your tastes.  How goes your planning on this project?

Three points:
1.  I don't support a limited hours D2 server although I have in the past.  At this point, I support the idea of a GSA-based campaign.
2.  The loss of an ISC A/RM wouldn't really be a big deal since they haven't figured substantially in any D2 server I can think of.  I'm glad you hold the position but the ISC aren't really a ship that needs a captain as it is either lost at sea or run-a-ground.
3.  I don't have the coding skills nor the SFB/F&E knowledge to make a decent campaign, nor am I willing to pony up the time and cash to do so, nor if I designed one, do I think that anyone would be interested, or there would be an intentional boycott.

Be that as it may, I have my hopes pinned on the GSA-based campaign that Max is developing with a number of other people.  It isn't my ideal situation, but it is certainly better than alot of hex flipping silliness and AI retardation.

[Cleaven]

Julian,

I agree w/ your comments on the hours....luckily I have 2 buds who basically are on 24/7 and they've both said they'd be happy to man the server any times we wish it to be up....so rotating the server isn't a big deal from that perspective at all.  One is in the UK and the other in the USA.  Like you I am a father of 3 who does 10 to 14 hour days depending on load...no worries mate.

Cleven it's simple bro....lets say I tell the fed Admiral that he needs to attack a planet or patrol a series of hexes over a given time frame....he does just that and accepts only missions that meet that criteria (the server can be set up so that there are no or little mandatory missions)...alllowing everyone the chance to dance a bit.  I've play tested it and it works bud...if I get to hex xyz and it doesn't have the mission I need...I back out and re-enter -or- if I (we) are drafted into a non-mission specific battle then I can elect to bail and try to re-aquire the mission or go ahead and play the non-mission specfic battle....nothings locked in stone.....the only thing the system encourages is pvp play.

V 

Okay, so the admins are not really assigning missions at all. I can see a lot of confusion with people popping in and out of hexes trying to get missions and asking who moved in first and who's got the cab;e connection to host etc etc.

And then this bit about "bailing". Now that I know what you are talking about I can only say it is doomed. 40 people trying to run missions in 4 hexes in teams designated by an admiral who is in battle. Doomed! You know how hard it is to co-ordinate a fleet of 10 players trying to work in pairs to ambush a target. Now to get that target to stand still and others to not move while you regroup your fleet to go in again for a mission that you cant find. Nope. If you can work out how to assign those fleets like the D3 does then you are on a roll, but there is too much pot-luck when it come to large numbers working a few hexes in the D2. We have enough problems with "who dropped" and so-and-so is forfeiting etc.

[TotensBurntCorpse]

I would tend to think that the current setup works rather well.

As we tend to have LOS to flip hexes now, PvP is assured as soon as the sides meet.

Part of the fun of the PvP is the randomnous of the matchups.  Very rarely will it be 1v1 or 2v2 with identically matched ships.  To me this is part of the fun.  I would tend to think that our 500BPV vs your 500BPV may be pallatable to some but for me this doenst cut my cheeze.

A GSA based campaign would be the ultimate in fighting a OoB campaign for what we have now, however I have been down this road before and the sheer act of coordinating and scoring the battles is a MAJOR agony.

Personally I would love to see an OoB applied to a D2 campaign.  Simple and straight up.  Your side has such and such ships available.  Your econ can only build the following ships.  Conversions cost so much extra econ.  Econ is based upon the number of key planets, asteroids, black holes, nebula hexes held at the beginning of a round.  Each build of a ship costs X amount of build econ points.  Ships below a certain BPV value, or certain ships are free for alls.

Much like the way items are purchased in axis and allies, soldiers cost 3 pts, tanks cost 5 pts, fighters cost 12 pts, bombers cost 18 pts, subs cost 8 pts etc etc etc,

EX...
Round one - Klingons have enough key hexes to warrant 50 build points...(for early ex)
1) 10 BP spent on a C5 DN
2) 30 BP spent on 6 D7Cs
3) 9 BP spent on 9 F5D conversions

Basic ships such as F5s, D6s, D7s etc are free for all.  IE any ship with a Letter after the name other than an upgrade would cost BPs.

Ships bigger than CAs would ALL COST BPs.

EX a fed CA is free for all, as is the CA+, BUT a CC would be a conversion costing 1 BP to make a CA into a CC, the CC then could be traded for a CC+ as they become available at no cost.

IMHO this may seem tedious but I think would work very easily once BASIC ships of the FF, DD, CL, CA classes are agreed upon.  Any extra letters after the basic ship would typically cost 1 pt to convert.

Ships that are heavier than CAs would require BP to make the ship then BP to make the conversion....
proposed example....
BC - 5 bp to build
BCH - +1bp to convert
DN - 10 bp to build (regarless of lite reg or heavy) + 1bp to convert
CVA - 15 bp to build (regarless of lite reg or heavy) +1bp to convert
BB - 30 bp to build +1bp to convert
Star Bases...
BS - 5 pts
BttlS - 10 pts
SB - 30 pts

The above ships would be cheap to buy, but limited by the following........
ONLY
1 BB per side online at a time
2 DN per side
1 CVA
4 BC
Any number of bases can be bought up to the cash limit (bases would be destroyable)

Loss of the above ships is reported as the construction points used to build them are now gone.

From the above ship loss only be posted in a thread here.  BP spending also posted here.  Who flys what then for the most part becomes academic.  In this way the casual player and the nutter alike all get a crack at the heavy iron, as who can fly what is really driven by the RM allowing people to fly them.

In the sake of fun I think everyone could be given a crack at flying the heavy iron.  On GW2 as lyran we went down the list such that pretty much anyone who flew lyran consistantly could get a BP ship to fly.  If we allow a MAX online limit then assuming they are in service more than destroyed we could do exactly what was done on RDSL when LOCKNAR was first made available.

Which was...
Locknar was an open account that everyone had access to.  there were litterally about 12 pilots who flew the locknar as the ship was shared.  if she was destroyed then she was gone and the account would become dead.

just some thoughts