Topic: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG  (Read 34937 times)

0 Members and 14 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline SSCF-LeRoy

  • Kim's Clubhouse Painter
  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 923
  • Gender: Male
  • Captain
    • SSCF.net
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #40 on: July 14, 2004, 09:27:52 pm »
Perhaps what is called for is an AF-like server that runs perpetually (is that possible?) that would provide a diversion when there aren't any other severs running or no servers running that appeal to a given person's taste. A simple, straightforward server with minimal rules and downloads that could form the basis of a persistant universe that could also be a nifty RP tool as well. We could still have our structured, mission-specific theme servers like RDSL, LB5, KCW, etc. while we constantly run a general purpose universe where anything can happen.

Offline SPQR Renegade

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #41 on: July 14, 2004, 09:36:19 pm »
Perhaps you missed Sockys statement: "Every race has a light cruiser that will run two to three minute missions over and over and over.  Yeah, even the early era Gorn and Romulan."
- I do not disagree with him.

Sockfoot is full of p00p.

Now, Romulans can be effective in a modern D2.  I think I'm malking a difference on this server.   In a pure hex-munching situation I might as well not even show up.

I have to agree with DH on this one (excuse me while I wash out my mouth  :P ). Given the stock shiplist, stock missions, and typical server settings (old servers, I've been out of the loop for a while), there is only one ship that can run 3 minute missions without relying on the dreaded PFs. The KRC. The only way it can kill another CA in one pass, is to take an alpha on the nose, anchor the AI, spend all it's mines in an overrun, then return to base for resupply before returning for the next fight. If you wanna talk PFs, then the CH, KDP, &Sea-E (?) are expensive, but can hold their own in late. The Gorn are in the same boat, and the Lyrans and ISC are in a boat not far from us.

In a campaing that's designed around painting void space in your chosen color, you can bet there won't be much green or brown on the map. In a campaign that's designed around controling small specific areas of space or set up such that ship loss hurts (be it VCs, PP cost, or availability of replacements), we'll do as well as player hours will allow. It's always been that way, and until R/G/I/L have boats that can turn out the damage/turn/bpv numbers of a small drone armed ship, it will stay that way.

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #42 on: July 14, 2004, 11:52:53 pm »
I'm drunk so bear with me . . .

What if CERTAIN romulan ships, only a few, got a really low BPV drop that were set assssisde specificly to be  'hex-munchers?"  For example, take the Sparrohawk mauler and give it a BPV of like 75.  This ships should be able to compete with the D5Ds of the world in Hex-munching but won't cause a disturbance in PvP balance.

In SGODev, the small Romulan/Gorn Plasma-fighter carrieres also fill this kind of a role.

My mission times in an R-SUK were not that bad against CCs, 3-4 minutes.   I can live with that.
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


Offline Lepton

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1620
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #43 on: July 15, 2004, 12:24:14 am »
Mogster, I agree that change was needed, but I think that in the process a lot of the fun went out of the game and the constant bickering over what seemed to us <non-SFB fanatics> as inconsequential details soured many on the entire D2 experience.  Lepton, I guess that you could set up a nice sterile server where each move is countered by another move, much like an exciting game of ...zzzz... chess, but your server is going to have a mighty small population unless some elements of F U N are involved, and I don't see that happening at any time in the future.  You speak of ai and balance, but how many times in a GSA environment have you taken a CL up against a BB and actually pushed it, hoping against hope to somehow gain some kind of advantage against a superior ship?  That WAS one of the virtues of D2 play, IMO, but nowadays pvp seems to be a faint shadow of what it was on the earlier servers.  I'll stick with this game until the end, but believe me, something has been lost in the process.  :-X

Three points:

1.  I have no idea what you are talking about here.  I would never set up a server nor do I have any idea where you think I have characterized some kind of server setup or that you are even describing something coherent here.

2.  Again, there is absolutely nothing to prevent one on a D2 server from running headlong in a CL into a ship that outclasses you but it most likely won't be a BB on any recent server, so I have no idea what exactly what you are trying to say here.

3.  Finally, if something has been lost since those early servers and if you have an opinion on what it is, you haven't expressed it here in any coherent manner.  I'm not sure you even know what you mean, except that you used to like things better back then for some reason (I chalk it up to nostalgia and the newness of the game at that time), and now it doesn't seem as good as it was (I chalk that up to boredom with something that is so familiar you could play it in your sleep).


System Specs:

Dell Dimension E521
AMD64x2 5000+
2G DDR2 RAM
ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB GDDR3
250GB SATA HD

Offline likkerpig

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2614
  • Gender: Male
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #44 on: July 15, 2004, 12:39:36 am »
I'm drunk so bear with me . . .


I hear ya brother....
hic
"Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby."



Offline Mog

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 610
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #45 on: July 15, 2004, 02:16:34 am »
Ok, Bonk, I see what you meant about SFC3 now, though I can't think of many who have gone over to it permanently.

As to the Rom situation, see Renegade's post. He sums that situation up succinctly. I've flown those races myself and I concur with him.

Damn, running out of time to finish this, will probably post more at work.
Merriment is All

Fear the Meow!

Offline Gook

  • Catbert
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 405
  • Gender: Male
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #46 on: July 15, 2004, 03:45:02 am »
Lots of good points, good one guys.

The principal problem is shrinking player base, yes its a 4 year old game, but people don't fly it for pretty graphics (though if produced a they are a bonus). The Alleged changes for thre good have not arrested the shrinking player base. I know for a fact that they have prevented at least 10 potential returnees I contacted, who showed an interest in returning, but when setups and changes were explained it was, "so long and thanks for all the fish". New peeps have horendous problems with DLs and you really have to be a fanatic to get on now. I would have left the game again by now if I did not really want it to work. The game can produce all those facets of conflict other than PvP, we have seen it in the past. That is what makes the game different from 100 other space/wargame progs, that and the deeply ingrained TOS/TNG programming every SFC player has.

We know there is a pretty even split between the types of game on the existing player base. I also know  that no system will be perfect, but we should try and cater for a majority most of the time rather than the just plain loud :) ( I shout a lot because I see very little constructive arguement and lots of snappy one liner put downs).

I actually want to play the game for good PvP as well as ALL the other stuff (insert Lep's reply here :) ).

You know the one of the first thing I noticed after my return from enforced retirement due to RL issues, that was a sense of gloom, a lack of cameraderie, even in the fleets. A sense of homogonization rather than a revelling in the differences and strengths and weaknesses of the races. Read the AF intercepts, morale was sky high, if there was a problem, they didn't whine, they dealt with it, the can do attitude which seems to have dissipated, and to and extent has been replaced by arguements akin to counting angels in pin heads.

The reason I kept posting all the old stuff was to counter the inaccurate description of the "bad old days" which were incessantly mentioned. they were not bad, they were fun, they had their problems, anything to do with human interaction does (trust me I'm a lawyer I know this stuff :) ). Not everything new is bad, but it is not all good either. What I see is little attention paid to anything other than the sacred cow of PvP, which is now the be all and end all. The funny thing is PvP means much more when the associated stuff is around.

I have under my name some awards, they mean nothing to all but a few, but they mean stuff to me and I am very proud to have be honoured by them, it enhanced my game experience as well as flattering my overblown ego. So When Kor awarded me the Order of the Black Star and made me, a scabby old Pussy a member of the House of Kor the Klingon Chancellor, pride swelled in my breast. When Dogmatix awarded me the Star of Kahless,  a Klingon battle honour I was speechless (yes really), when Steel Claw awarded me the Most Trusted Ally award I was humbled and when I got the Order of the Wendigo (which I am prevented from discussing by organisational NDAs but some of you know what it is on your Stetsons ;) ) It MEANT something, not to many, but it did to me. Now Poopoo the medals all you want, the people who gave them did not make worthless gestures, they did so because they wanted to make a point in gameterms. Now I am not suggesting we go all weepy and award each other medals, they are just examples of game enhancement which need no rules and just happen when people are having a good time.

No one is right or wrong here, but we do need to listen and try and cater to the many, lest a few more slip away from the game, largely unnoticed.
KAT-Gook, OBS,OoW,MTA,SoK.
KAT-Fleet
Kzinti Hegemony

The God of War hates those who hesitate
.....Eurypides



Offline Mog

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 610
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #47 on: July 15, 2004, 06:47:28 am »
Gook, while these posts of yours are, hmm, educational for the newer members, you are omitting one thing. Your solution. How do you propose we bring the old players back without alienating the current 50% that like the way things are?

Having been one of those who have battled to get more relevance for pvp in campaign terms, I am not interested in abandoning that aspect, and, despite what you say about the "200 late slugfest", which I still maintain isn't 100% accurate, Sockfoot's post states pvp is basically meaningless in that campaign style.

I also have no desire to see the return of unlimited DNs and BBs, or squadrons of 3 carriers (for fairness to the non-drone uising races I would include 3 drone ship squadrons too, but personally I enjoyed fighting and defeating those with one ship), which I'd hope you'd agree with. Sadly, a decent OOB is too awkward to implement without SQL, hence we have the way it's done now with CnC and FM rules. If you can suggest a better way of achieving OOB, please let us know.

I also have to say that the prospect of a huge map that is mostly neutral space, requiring several weeks of repetitive ai bashing, before the empires can make contact just doesn't appeal to me one iota. RT3 and AOTK had the best maps imo.

You mention downloads being a problem. I agree on that. I'm fed up with having to download stuff for campaigns, even though I'm on cable; it's a pain.

Laffy, I can't put my finger exactly on what you perceive as being missing. Lack of meaningful forum activity? - ie the long roleplaying threads no longer seem to be around, when one is started it seems to fizzle out. I dont know.
Merriment is All

Fear the Meow!

Offline Capt Jeff

  • 1AF
  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 736
  • Gender: Male
    • Facebook
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #48 on: July 15, 2004, 06:58:03 am »
Yes, I'm glad all of these "Improvements" have kept sooo many people playing....

So, as long as we are waxing nostalgaic about the differences between the olde days and the now days, which "improvements", specifically, do you think are actually detriments?

For my next campaign, some of the old-school stuff actually makes sense.  I might (or might not) want to take some of your thoughts on board.

-S'Cipio the Herr Burt


1.  Secret VC's.   Make some secret !!  Keep the enemies guessing as to what you want.  SS2 had both static and secret VC's.   If possible, set them up so that the sides will have to cross paths to get their points, thus creating PvP zones.  Makes both sides happy as hex munchers can continue towards goal, while PvP'ers can protect your goals.

2.  LOS.   ELIMINATE LOS RULES !!!  The only rule regarding LOS should be that you can't place a base unless there is LOS.  Why someone shouldn't be able to deepstrike and take a enemy planet is beyond me.

3.  Deepstriking.   Should be allowed.  I could see a "fight to the death" rule if deepstriker is in enemy space.

4.  OOB.   I like the LB5 set up soooo much!  No admin hassles trying to get a FM a ship or anything !   I'd say 1 BB/DNH, 1 DN, and 3 BCH per race, or LESS at any given time.  Make them affordable so almost anyone could fly one by server end so it's not elitest.

5.  Fleets.  Admins decision.  I myself can do with fleets allowed or not allowed.

6.  Disengagement rule should stay.   Probably the single truely needed rule to help the slower, less munching races.  Though, I'd like to see less punishment of those who fight to the death....maybe 10 turns if run off, and 2 if killed?

7.   Downloads.   Small as possible, and a installer for the computer impaired...

8.  DV shifts.   Make neutral (outer reaches) very low DV so there will be a honest tug of war.

Probably more, but I got one burnin and I need some munchies...

This will not take us back to the old days, but I think it is more of a compromise to keep some of the good that has come along, while letting players explore different aspects of warfare then just the trench style we've been playing in lately...


Lastly,  with all due respect for the SPQR, GDA, GPF, and other non-drone/fighter race players....
I think the largest amounts of people to leave this game ARE they drone races.  The Gorn, Lyran, and Roms never had a huge playerbase, and it's true that they are all but gone, but what about the Feds, Klingons, and Mirak?   Yes there are some left, but huge amounts of those players are gone now.  Probably twice as many as the Roms, Gorn, and Lyrans ever had to begin with.  Why?   I would bet all the rules, regulations, and limitations put into place to help the one group alienated a even larger group of the others.

My $.02...  and that I love all the races and all you guys...  ***Jeff, put down the joint and step away from the computer***
Capt Jeff

Former SFC2.NET Administrator
C.O., Heavy Command Cruiser
USS Crasher NCC 1733

1AF---Friendship, Honor, Fun.  It's what we Play For.

Offline Gook

  • Catbert
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 405
  • Gender: Male
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #49 on: July 15, 2004, 07:15:02 am »
Mog,

I don't think the two camps are polarised at the extremes, there may be some at both ends who are, but I guess the majority will fall somewhere in the middle.

Instant solution alternate servers, one restrictive and one without restrictions. Play what you want. The problem there is another split in the community that way, and we have had EAW/OP/D3 to fragment us enough. Probably a better solution would be have the Big background server as stock or whatever stock becomes, which gets slowed down or taken down whenever there is a time limited campaign on. It would give us a backdrop and allow for the more esoteric servers to be planned properly as there would not be the constant howls for the next one to come up.

As for OOBs etc I would happily sacrifice them for more fun, more involvement more heroic stands (yep just like your on GW1, which I hope becomes part of SFC lore and is quoted into the far future). The thing is while everyone (genralisation, I mean many) want to fly the biggest and best ship permitted by a given set of rules for PvP they will, unless there are viable alternatives, whether that be CVs, Droneboats, fleets or commando ships, or whatever is perceived as interupting the joust collecting VCs for same boat actions is a squash ladder, nothing against them, just don't play them myself. I just think if you fly the ABC ship you should be able to deal with everything, whether that's 3 drone boats (which really shouldn't be a problem, 3 CVs, or 3 PFTs) and if you can't you fly off, simple.

I generally fly a DWD, I have no problem about leaving the board when there is no chance of me winning, I have no expectation of winning every fight, I don't expect every fight to be equal.

The best PvP I have had has come out of those servers where there was more than  a dozen hexes that were worth fighting for and which spread the action over the entire map, CW6 is a classic example, tunnelling, a weeks heavy action, retrenchment, another attack elsewhere, more action etc etc.

Now you say how do I keep you happy, and everyone else, I can't, but we can keep more people happy than we do, if we don't a big dyna will just be a six sided IP game. Funnily enough, I know 762 and DH and I are a lot closer in what we want than is apparent on the boards, I guess at a push you and I would  see eye to eye on 90% of stuff, we just gotta work on the 10% ;)

KAT-Gook, OBS,OoW,MTA,SoK.
KAT-Fleet
Kzinti Hegemony

The God of War hates those who hesitate
.....Eurypides



Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #50 on: July 15, 2004, 08:05:51 am »

1.  Secret VC's.   Make some secret !!  Keep the enemies guessing as to what you want.  SS2 had both static and secret VC's.   If possible, set them up so that the sides will have to cross paths to get their points, thus creating PvP zones.  Makes both sides happy as hex munchers can continue towards goal, while PvP'ers can protect your goals.

Yes.  A good idea.  Jjust makes sure the sides actually get the corret VCs at the begining of every round  :P

2.  LOS.   ELIMINATE LOS RULES !!!  The only rule regarding LOS should be that you can't place a base unless there is LOS.  Why someone shouldn't be able to deepstrike and take a enemy planet is beyond me.

LOS should stay.   For one thing, it give people who aren't up for front-line action something to do.  Best thing about LOS for "strategic" players is they can be cut.  Removing LOS makes D2 less strategic, not more.

No, a solo CW taking a homeworld without supply is retarded. 

3.  Deepstriking.   Should be allowed.  I could see a "fight to the death" rule if deepstriker is in enemy space.

Yes, the SS2 deepstriking rules were/are perfect.  Good to see J'inn adopted them on GW.

4.  OOB.   I like the LB5 set up soooo much!  No admin hassles trying to get a FM a ship or anything !   I'd say 1 BB/DNH, 1 DN, and 3 BCH per race, or LESS at any given time.  Make them affordable so almost anyone could fly one by server end so it's not elitest.

Pray for SQL, we will never get a decent OOB system working without it.   I like the build points system from GW2, but i would like to see ships more easily transfereable, BCHs could be transfered on that server but DNs could not. 

Yes I am being an SFB-grognard here, but BCH ships are supposed to be AS rare as DNs.   BCHs are not super-cruisers, they are mini-DNs.  We need to remember this if/when any OOB is setup

5.  Fleets.  Admins decision.  I myself can do with fleets allowed or not allowed.

I love flying fleets, I have adapted to one-ship-per pilot.  Fleets can come back with good CnC, unlimited cheese is dumb.   SG3 had the best CnC rules, 2 ships only and the second ship had to be vannila.  Hard to do a cheesey combo with that but it gives people more options.

6.  Disengagement rule should stay.   Probably the single truely needed rule to help the slower, less munching races.  Though, I'd like to see less punishment of those who fight to the death....maybe 10 turns if run off, and 2 if killed?

Run off = 100 minutes
Killed = 50 minutes
Killed in a Vannilla ship = 10 minutes

People in cheese/"PvP" ships need to still pay if they get killed.   There is not point in having a disenagement rule is a hex-flipper can simply fly a 500-1000 PP ship kamikaze-stylel.

7.   Downloads.   Small as possible, and a installer for the computer impaired...

No kidding!  Thank God for FS and Pesty.

8.  DV shifts.   Make neutral (outer reaches) very low DV so there will be a honest tug of war.

100% agree.   This is done on GW.
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


Offline Mog

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 610
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #51 on: July 15, 2004, 08:33:50 am »
Sorry, but I am 100% against multiple carrier/tender squadrons being allowed. It's simply ludicrous to allow players to fly that setup. 3 drone boats, I can live with, but there is no way a single ship could possibly take on 36 or more fighters or 12 pfs plus motherships. All that does is require everyone to be flying the same combination, which is no different from your perceived 200 late joust, which then just degenerates into who's ai behaves better, lol. No skill involved in that I'm afraid.

PvP VCs. I've always advocated VCs for killing ships of CL class and greater. Use RDSL's system - is a simplified version of one I proposed a couple of years ago. It gives casual players flying the smaller ships more of a chance to contribute VCs. Limiting pvp VCs to the big guns isn't enough, imo.

I've never asked for equal battles. Ask around, I'm usually outhulled (Mav will tell you that I ought to be in ships 2 hull sizes smaller than everyone else lol. I think that's a bit OTT myself, I'm often 1 hull size down). For me, flying the smaller ships and trying to defeat larger ones is the most exciting part of the game. It's why I never got into ladder play and always preferred to be here - the mismatches (to an extent, see first paragraph) make it more fun. On that we agree.

AOTK was a blast for pvp. That was spread all over the map - Kitty front, the middle neutral zone and the Fed front was virtually non-stop pvp. GW1 wasn't just confined to one area either. In fact, i cannot recall a server where pvp was limited to just one area.

I've said I'd hate to see a huge map with neutral areas like AF map. I'd play on it, but probably not until just before the empires meet. I have single player for beating on ai, with no chance of having the dreaded "you have been disconnected from the server" message, after spending over an hour on a planet or starbase assault.

We all want, essentially, the same thing. We want a fun, thriving place to play in, hopefully with long lost brethren returning (just not too bloody many Feds please ;) ). My main concern is returning to Sockfoot's diatribe up there regarding pvp. It should count.
Merriment is All

Fear the Meow!

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #52 on: July 15, 2004, 09:19:43 am »
Sorry, but I am 100% against multiple carrier/tender squadrons being allowed. It's simply ludicrous to allow players to fly that setup. 3 drone boats, I can live with, but there is no way a single ship could possibly take on 36 or more fighters or 12 pfs plus motherships. All that does is require everyone to be flying the same combination, which is no different from your perceived 200 late joust, which then just degenerates into who's ai behaves better, lol. No skill involved in that I'm afraid.

Curious as to your opinion to what was allowed on SG3. One command, one vannila. 

I don't think anyone really thinks allowin 3 carrier/tenders is a good idea. 
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


Offline Mog

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 610
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #53 on: July 15, 2004, 09:30:40 am »
DH, if I could live with people flying 3 drone boats (don't really like that idea but I could live with it), then I can live with your proposal also. As long as I, as a single ship player, am not toally cheesed out of the game, I'm fine.

I wouldn't be so sure on your last sentence.
Merriment is All

Fear the Meow!

Offline SSCF-LeRoy

  • Kim's Clubhouse Painter
  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 923
  • Gender: Male
  • Captain
    • SSCF.net
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #54 on: July 15, 2004, 09:48:05 am »
Probably a better solution would be have the Big background server as stock or whatever stock becomes, which gets slowed down or taken down whenever there is a time limited campaign on. It would give us a backdrop and allow for the more esoteric servers to be planned properly as there would not be the constant howls for the next one to come up.

Yes!!!

Offline Kroma BaSyl

  • Romulan Tart
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2276
  • Don't hate me because I'm beautiful.
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #55 on: July 15, 2004, 10:46:31 am »

1.  Secret VC's.   Make some secret !!  Keep the enemies guessing as to what you want.  SS2 had both static and secret VC's.   If possible, set them up so that the sides will have to cross paths to get their points, thus creating PvP zones.  Makes both sides happy as hex munchers can continue towards goal, while PvP'ers can protect your goals.

Yes.  A good idea.  Jjust makes sure the sides actually get the corret VCs at the begining of every round  :P

Agreed.

Quote

2.  LOS.   ELIMINATE LOS RULES !!!  The only rule regarding LOS should be that you can't place a base unless there is LOS.  Why someone shouldn't be able to deepstrike and take a enemy planet is beyond me.

LOS should stay.   For one thing, it give people who aren't up for front-line action something to do.  Best thing about LOS for "strategic" players is they can be cut.  Removing LOS makes D2 less strategic, not more.

No, a solo CW taking a homeworld without supply is retarded. 

Agreed.

Quote

3.  Deepstriking.   Should be allowed.  I could see a "fight to the death" rule if deepstriker is in enemy space.

Yes, the SS2 deepstriking rules were/are perfect.  Good to see J'inn adopted them on GW.

Disagree. With the disengagement rule and a LOS rule for flipping hexes, this is really unnecessary, as there is only so much havoc a deepstriker can make.

Quote
4.  OOB.   I like the LB5 set up soooo much!  No admin hassles trying to get a FM a ship or anything !   I'd say 1 BB/DNH, 1 DN, and 3 BCH per race, or LESS at any given time.  Make them affordable so almost anyone could fly one by server end so it's not elitest.

Pray for SQL, we will never get a decent OOB system working without it.   I like the build points system from GW2, but i would like to see ships more easily transfereable, BCHs could be transfered on that server but DNs could not. 

Yes I am being an SFB-grognard here, but BCH ships are supposed to be AS rare as DNs.   BCHs are not super-cruisers, they are mini-DNs.  We need to remember this if/when any OOB is setup

I too would rather see FM spots more portable, as this would allow more folks to fly the big boys.  I would make the FM spots for BCHs/DNs completely transferable at a moments notice, I would NOT have any "special" VCs for killing these ships (a general VC scheme for any PvP killls would be fine though). If you get killed or driven off in an FM ship then the disengagement penalty stays with the ship as well as the particular pilot (thus no transfering the FM spot just to allow your teams BCH/DN back into a hex. Also if you are killed in a FM ship you should be restricted from being assigned as the FM for say 24 hours. The rational for removing the VC penalty is so that RMs are freer to spread the FM wealth without worrying over much about the risk of giving such a valuable asset to a less experienced pilot, or assigning it to a pilot that might not be on as much thus making that assignment a waste since it can't be transferred.

If you still wanted to simulate attrition of BCH/DNs you could possibly designate a time that the FM ship becomes irreplacable, say after the first few days it has been available. This way the RMs still have a period of time in which they can risk passing the FM slots around to all players, but also allow for the BCH/DNs to be removed from play over time.


Quote
5.  Fleets.  Admins decision.  I myself can do with fleets allowed or not allowed.

I love flying fleets, I have adapted to one-ship-per pilot.  Fleets can come back with good CnC, unlimited cheese is dumb.   SG3 had the best CnC rules, 2 ships only and the second ship had to be vannila.  Hard to do a cheesey combo with that but it gives people more options.

I would still go for 3 ship fleets with a good CnC that limits all specialty ships to no more than 1 per fleet. Maybe it could be have if you have a CA or larger in the fleet it is limited to 2 ships but if you go with CLs or smaller 3 ship combos are allowed, with tight CnC (GZ PBR is good for this).

Quote
6.  Disengagement rule should stay.   Probably the single truely needed rule to help the slower, less munching races.  Though, I'd like to see less punishment of those who fight to the death....maybe 10 turns if run off, and 2 if killed?

Run off = 100 minutes
Killed = 50 minutes
Killed in a Vannilla ship = 10 minutes

People in cheese/"PvP" ships need to still pay if they get killed.   There is not point in having a disenagement rule is a hex-flipper can simply fly a 500-1000 PP ship kamikaze-stylel.

I too think the disengagement rule is a must. At first your idea of allowing vannilla ships return from a kill faster was appealing, but the issue it might pose is that some races vannilla ships can run missions many times faster than others vannilla ships, which creates a situation identical to simply reducing the Killed (in any ship) penalty to 10 minutes as far as racial balance is concerned.

Quote
7.   Downloads.   Small as possible, and a installer for the computer impaired...

No kidding!  Thank God for FS and Pesty.

K.I.S.S.

Quote
8.  DV shifts.   Make neutral (outer reaches) very low DV so there will be a honest tug of war.

100% agree.   This is done on GW.

Agreed.
♥ ♥ ♥  GDA Kroma BaSyl  ♥ ♥ ♥
GCS Prima Ballerina
GCS PHAT Gorn
GCS Queen Kroma


Because this game makes me feel like  a thirteen year old girl trapped in a lizards body.

Offline Bonk

  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 13298
  • You don't have to live like a refugee.
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #56 on: July 15, 2004, 11:06:38 am »
... hence we have the way it's done now with CnC and FM rules...

CnC? What CnC? I don't recall a campaign that allowed more than one ship per player in recent history... I've been arguing for allowing fleets with proper SFB style CnC rules for ages now... I tink we miss a lot of the game flying single ships.

Offline Kroma BaSyl

  • Romulan Tart
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2276
  • Don't hate me because I'm beautiful.
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #57 on: July 15, 2004, 11:14:26 am »
... hence we have the way it's done now with CnC and FM rules...

CnC? What CnC? I don't recall a campaign that allowed more than one ship per player in recent history... I've been arguing for allowing fleets with proper SFB style CnC rules for ages now... I tink we miss a lot of the game flying single ships.

Totally agree. GZs PBR is a very good SFB style CnC.
♥ ♥ ♥  GDA Kroma BaSyl  ♥ ♥ ♥
GCS Prima Ballerina
GCS PHAT Gorn
GCS Queen Kroma


Because this game makes me feel like  a thirteen year old girl trapped in a lizards body.

Offline Lepton

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1620
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #58 on: July 15, 2004, 11:20:29 am »
I love this revisionist history.  From what I know people started leaving this game because of the bad old day problems, not the new-hotness solutions to those problems.  And if people can't manage to get the DLs working for the current set of campaigns, then they must be certified idiots and should not be permitted to own a computer.  I mean, this isn't rocket science. It's a GUI-based operating system.  Server DLs now include installers that do it all for you, and before these installers, all I ever had to do to play on a download-required server was to swap out the shiplists and fighterlists.  How hard is that?  Copy and paste.  Go back to the home, grandpa.  It's apple sauce time.


System Specs:

Dell Dimension E521
AMD64x2 5000+
2G DDR2 RAM
ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB GDDR3
250GB SATA HD

Offline TotensBurntCorpse

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 106
  • Gender: Male
Re: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG
« Reply #59 on: July 15, 2004, 11:25:53 am »
I would propose this...(as IMHO it had the best overall fun factors)

1) OoB for BCH n higher with VC kills
2) Disengagement rules, but if u die in a vanilla ship one size down u dont have to leave
3) Secret and public VCs
4) Strong DV and Econ but physically small home starting space, with weak econ and DV neutral hexes
5) Starting in neutral space a sprinkling of medium DV planets
6) Deepstriking anywhere on map but only to neutrality, LOS needed to flip hexes
7)  Deepstriking beyond more than 2 enemy hexes in any direction is fight to the death if caught
8) Heavy iron is cheap but has item 1) attached
9) Multi ship fleets (2 ships) but one ship MUST be Vannilla (ie run of the mill FF DD CL CA, with BC and bigger NOT BEING VANNILLA)
10) Lead ship MUST be one size class bigger than the wing ship in a two ship fleet
11) STANDARDIZATION on either mission pack or shiplists with models (i love the FS OP pack with models, too bad it dont get used much, if ppl just down load it ONCE and the shiplist and fighter list were based around this model pack I would be a happier camper)
12) Bases are resonably priced but destroyable, needing a LOS to place (if a ring of defensive belt was placed around it then deepstriking the kill would be dicey for the attacker), can only be placed with a one hex gap to the next nearest base, possibly make a modified Star Base as the only base, ie bigger than a battlestation but smaller than a true Star Base
13) Bring back G ships, I havent seen commando boats in the klingon yards for ages, but most other races still have commando boats.  What gives?
14) CnC on fighters/PFs for all races, flying with a hull full of the top of the line fighters/PFs is IMHO frankly retarded.  A true carrier would have a mix of them rather than one type only.  ie PFL+s maybe nice to have but operationally there is only ONE PF LEADER per flotilla not 4.
15) VCs per round (say a week or every two weeks) should be something that particular races can actually "ACHIEVE".  If a race is being toasted then they should be given a "LIFT" and given for the next round more attainable VC conditions.  I for one am not a fan of peeing in the wind, its boring, frustrating and a major morale killer.
16) FINALLY my last retarded suggestion...
Given we all admit we are on a declining player base, would anyone be interested in a purely DRAFT campaign where all players are "picked" from the hat to play either coalition or alliance.  One problem we have now is we still have the causual player base and the nutter player base.  We all know who are reputed to be the historic nutters.  If we have too many nutters on one side the above suggestions would for the most part fall thru.

17) Another FINNALLY...
And this would be something from RDSL that I think was a very innovative way to do Heavy Iron...
POSSIBLY set up a Loknar account at the campaign start with a crap load of PP, one per race.  This account cand be used to both BUY bases, and be the basis for the fleets Fielded Heaviest Iron.  IE only the Loknar account can fly the races DN, DNH or BB.  This account would be shared by the race and the RM/ARM would be responsible to make sure ALL PLAYERS of that race get a shot at flying the ship, there will be no favorites there for who gets to fly the ship.  The account would have sufficent PP in it to buy 10+ such ships, but every time one is lost that race gives up VC points.  At least every day a NEW pilot must be selected to fly the ship, to prevent a great pilot from being "stuck" in the ship.  That race would rotate thru the player list.  This worked on RDSL and I think would be a useful trial addition to any future campaigns.