Topic: Next stuff on the list

[Gook]

OK there does not seem to be much opposition to a background server, and if it happens all well and good.

Regarding "serious" servers generally I put up a list of possibilities for discussion. That list is repeated below for ease of reference. I'll deal with a point per post to keep the length down. Remember this is not now background but what we would like to see in most serious servers, not cast in stone, but a guideline.

1. OP+ ship and fighter list, with many parts restricted out, but that can be done server side

2. An agreed mission pack to be 65%-70% stock missions with the remainder ED/EEK, such missions to be agreed.

3. Map size depends on Admin and campaign in question

4. Destructable bases as standard

5. Shipping lanes and planet linkage at Admins discretion

6. Public and secret VCs

7. All parties encouraged to politik and use ruse guerre and anything else to make the peripherals and game build up fun.

8. Spying probably out but is a Rommie trait

9. Rather than make droner missions harder, drop BPVs (which only affect AI battles) for Plasma races by 10% to help their mission times as there is a perception if not a reality they are slower. This would encourage more people to play the under played races and speed up the game as all players would be able to approach droner flip times. This would obviously have to be put into OP+ list to be downloaded. I am suggesting it as there have been many attempts to slow down the droners, but none have worked, and frankly I for one am tired of being experimented on. Lets make eveybody flip equally fast and speed the game process up as whole.

10. Deepstrikes no reason that these should not be permitted anywhere. A combination of missions makes them more difficult and NOT having a secure flank and rear adds piquancy.

11. Disengagement rule in place

12. No Alt/F4 out to save ship

13. Ship prices to be discussed but all ships to be achievable by Rear Admiral status

12. Fleets allowed, no restrictions. If it becomes a real problem look at it again, but large CV fleets will be implausible at the current prices for all but a few and if they get gangbanged they will soon be bankrupt and they are slower to flip. The most hated fleet the 3 PFT fleet is in the least played races so it should not be a problem and again costs will have their part to play.

1. Shiplist/Fighter list.

I suggested OP+ because it is in common use already. If we were able to secure FS's consent to its use, I would suggest it at least in the short/medium term. I know not everybody agrees with it all (I'm one), but it does command the respect and acceptance of most players. The DIPlist is new, it has had one run, and the concept of "combat effectiveness" is far from accepted although there have been some in favour there are many against it. Depending on the type of campaign in use, liberal use of the "R" in the OP+list will make it manaegable and useable. As it is so extensive changes can be made server side without the need for DLs and that gives it flexibility.

We need to try and fix on one list for sometime to keep stuff simple and reduce DLs. As well as sheer familarity with the list.

Post below thoughts on shiplist/fighterlist for general campaign use in the short/medium term. So if you think the DIPlist better say so, but try and keep the topic on general lists rather than a discussion on the DIPlist performance in LB5. We can do that elsewhere. Personally I'd prefer stock until we work  a lot more stuff out on shiplists, especially input from races on HDDs etc, but that will probbaly not be acceptable to most, so I suggest the currently most acceptable list, OP+

[SSCF-LeRoy]

As far as patch concerns for n00bs and returnees go, why not setup "roadsign" servers that are compatible with earlier builds and contain instructions for visitors in the server description to visit Dynaverse.net for the latest patches?

[FPF-DieHard]

Next concern about a persistant "Sandbox" server.  OP+ changes, stock does not.

[Fluf]

Thats my concern too.  OP+ changes and FS is getting ready to change it again soon.  Hence any server would probably have to change its shiplist within the next 4 or 5 weeks.

Missions, still need work and tested.  Stock missions are ok, but many do not like them still, and they dont trigger properly with current server settings.  Until we get a stable mission pack, I would hold off on doing anything as a persistant server.

[FireSoul]

A man's gotta do what a man's gotta do. 

[Gook]

I obviously didn't make myself clear, this is NOT for the background server, that will be all stock. This is a discussion of the more serious servers and the shiplists we might want to use to avoid too many DLs. If would be easier on all if we could settle on one list while others are developed to the stage we want to adopt them as "standard". The object of this line of threads is to try and bring some uniformity back to campaigns AND take advantage of all the hard work put in by various  people. So if you had to choose a shiplist for say use until Christmas what would it be. I suggested OP+ as it is well known and genrally accepted and is comprehensive enough to allow admins to manipulate it without there having to be a DL for each server.

[FireSoul]

You do realize that I will continue...

.. besides, how is OP+ a big issue? I maintain large and small (no models) installers for the same core files. 260kb to download isn't much of an issue to download..  is it?

[Gook]

Of course I realise you will continue FS, and if you were to agree to the list being the "standard" list most will use, it can be used until such time as the "upgrades" are accepted.

On an entirely tangenital note why does the Kzin DDV (the original one) have 4 fighters when the SFB version has 12 (on my admitedly ancient SSDs anyhow), surely it should have 8 fighters? (designation may be DV, but the DD that was originally converted to fly ASS's off.

[Fluf]

No FS, its not a question of the downloads themselves.  Its up to the admin on what shiplist they want to use.

I myself dont like OP+ for dyna use.  Nothing against your work at all. You have done great work with OP+ and most of the community likes it.  But it lacks any of the fixes for certain ships and balances that are needed for D2 play.  

[FireSoul]

Of course I realise you will continue FS, and if you were to agree to the list being the "standard" list most will use, it can be used until such time as the "upgrades" are accepted.

On an entirely tangenital note why does the Kzin DDV (the original one) have 4 fighters when the SFB version has 12 (on my admitedly ancient SSDs anyhow), surely it should have 8 fighters? (designation may be DV, but the DD that was originally converted to fly ASS's off.

What do you mean "agree to the list being the standard"? I would have to not release stuff? .. you know I can't do that..

Z-DDV: Taldren's ship. I never checked it. If you want, I'll give it a pass later. ..

[FireSoul]

No FS, its not a question of the downloads themselves.  Its up to the admin on what shiplist they want to use.

I myself dont like OP+ for dyna use.  Nothing against your work at all. You have done great work with OP+ and most of the community likes it.  But it lacks any of the fixes for certain ships and balances that are needed for D2 play. 

This is indeed an old conversation rebrewing.

[Fluf]

No FS, its not a question of the downloads themselves.  Its up to the admin on what shiplist they want to use.

I myself dont like OP+ for dyna use.  Nothing against your work at all. You have done great work with OP+ and most of the community likes it.  But it lacks any of the fixes for certain ships and balances that are needed for D2 play. 

This is indeed an old conversation rebrewing.

I know bro.  So dont take it that way!

Dont get me wrong, I love your work.  But it is a SFB list.  And SFB is not SFC in any way.  Just like I will never fly on a server now that doesnt have the changes to the Kzin shiplist that I have worked on for over 3 years now. Things like Moggys BCH.  Balance on GSA is one thing.  Balance on the D2 is a completely different thing.

[Lepton]

Standard, shmandard.  Admins should put up whatever servers they want.  Often, they base their shiplist selections on OP+ as it is the most to work with.  This attempt to "norm" servers will merely make servers more bland and homogenous.  Stock is boring and limited and does not include a whole host of ships that people want to fly.  Stock is a step backward and your attempt to poo-poo anything you, Gook, haven't had a hand in developing is ridiculous. 

It's like we aren't expected to go past any point you aren't comfortable with.  Frankly, I feel your attempt to discuss D2 issues starts from the wrong foot yet again.  You can't seem to start the discussion without trying to control the process by constraning people's choices, offering your own opinions first and foremost, and framing and structuring the discussion to address a set of bullet points that is the manifesto for the type of server you want.  And here we all are reacting to you and furthering your agenda.  Perhaps you'd like to start by asking what people want or by working with everyone to agree on the issues and how they are framed.  You have absolutely no idea on how to work in a colloborative process.  You're like the guy who comes to the negotiation table with a list of his grievances and wants them all addressed first and won't listen to others' points of view without discounting them.  While you have eliminated the rhetoric thus far, by starting out with your list/manifesto you are framing the whole discussion from your POV and setting up the expectation that we need to address your issues.  If you don't see that, you're not very self-aware.  As long as you start this discussion with references to your manifesto and expecting people to structure their discussions around it, I will take it as just that.  A discussion of your manifesto and not D2 issues.  Get off your agenda.

By the way, you seem to have no idea what you are talking about as concerns OP+.  FS has an open policy with OP+ and its model structure.  Permission has been granted from the beginning as it was created to benefit the community.  Not that I would contest his right to reject permission, but to suggest that there is even an issue there is either disingenuous or ignorant.

[FireSoul]

By the way, you seem to have no idea what you are talking about as concerns OP+.  FS has an open policy with OP+ and its model structure.  Permission has been granted from the beginning as it was created to benefit the community.

It's true. The contents of OP+ is available to all for as long as it is not sold and used for profit. You should use what you like and make your own shiplist.

.. however... taking the name OP+ and making it your own.. and release a version 4.0 is out of the question, O-kay? 

[FPF-DieHard]

There is no standard.   There never will be.

Discuss specific campaigns, anything else is futile.

[GDA-S'Cipio]

What do you mean "agree to the list being the standard"? I would have to not release stuff? .. you know I can't do that..

I think you two are saying the same thing with different words.  It is my impression that Gook hopes you wouldn't mind OP+ 3.3 being the standard D2 list, for awhile, even if you have already released OP+ 4.x for public use on GSA and elsewhere.

From your replies and your former statements, I suspect that anyone using an older version of OP+ for their gaming wouldn't bother you at all.

-S'Cipio

[FireSoul]

From your replies and your former statements, I suspect that anyone using an older version of OP+ for their gaming wouldn't bother you at all.

-S'Cipio

Nope. I would feel some pity, however.

[Gook]

Yes stadardization is what I'm looking for. In the hey day of EAW and OP, there was one list. All those making servers used the same lists and same missions. Switching from server to server was a matter of logging off one and on to another, no DLs, install s etc. etc. If we can achieve a position whereby there is a consensus over the many diverse parts of the game (ship/fighterlists being one of the variables) then more choice will return. If there is consensus we can try and achieve a level of standardization to allow players to swich easily from server to server. At the moment there may be several servers up, but most play one at a time, and many do not get tried out because of the hassle factor. If more players try more servers, more people will be happy.

As for the exact version of whatever list may be used, that is what this thread is about. Whether it be OP+ (insert mod number), DIPlist, Stock, or some other.

One of the bugbears that has come out of discussions is DLs and their profusion, a standard list which everybody can get to know will help all round. Yes I have a preference, but that is just one opinion, my suggestion isn't even my preference, it's just a tried list that has general acceptance. We need more views.

[FireSoul]

I say: Let the admin decide what he/she/it wants to do..

[Julin Eurthyr]

I believe it will take some time to get a "standard" shiplist...

OP+ in whatever incarnation, is a very good place to start.  However, whether it's a straight OP+, modified in an attempt to trick in fighters / PFs for all, copy-pasted to have one race's ships in 4 different areas, or contains special ships / enhancements to reflect the nature of the D2 with it's random PvP nature, is always up to the admin.

Perhaps, over time, as the DIP shiplist process is refined and updated, it may become a de-facto standard.  Perhaps the liberally "R"ed OP+ will become the standard.  Who knows?  All I know is that until a standard is reached that many feel comfortable with, and even after, there will occasionally be servers with a special download like RDSL or something like that...

We knew in the DIP that this first shiplist was way out of whack.  We have been listening, and are getting ready to discuss the next round of edits and will update the shiplist.  Hopefully the second revision will be better than the first...

[Bonk]

<rant>

 

I have a problem with the download allergic... its the internet man! That's what its for!

I'd bet you dollars to donuts that these same complainers run P2P software downloading/uploading mp3s and porn divXs all day and have no qualms about it...

I have some sympathy for those on dial-up that have no choice about it, but if you're just cheap... tfb...

We've created installers to make it easier, used outrageous compression to squish the files down as small as possible... (e.g. 512MB --> 46MB)

I mean, there's a new windows update more often than there is a new OP+...

I could rant more but I'll restrain myself...

</rant>

[FPF-DieHard]

I say: Let the admin decide what he/she/it wants to do..

Newsflash, this is how it will be no matter what is "decided" in the forums.

[Lepton]

Yes stadardization is what I'm looking for. In the hey day of EAW and OP, there was one list. All those making servers used the same lists and same missions. Switching from server to server was a matter of logging off one and on to another, no DLs, install s etc. etc. If we can achieve a position whereby there is a consensus over the many diverse parts of the game (ship/fighterlists being one of the variables) then more choice will return. If there is consensus we can try and achieve a level of standardization to allow players to swich easily from server to server. At the moment there may be several servers up, but most play one at a time, and many do not get tried out because of the hassle factor. If more players try more servers, more people will be happy.

As for the exact version of whatever list may be used, that is what this thread is about. Whether it be OP+ (insert mod number), DIPlist, Stock, or some other.

One of the bugbears that has come out of discussions is DLs and their profusion, a standard list which everybody can get to know will help all round. Yes I have a preference, but that is just one opinion, my suggestion isn't even my preference, it's just a tried list that has general acceptance. We need more views.

Gook, I could not disagree more.  "Standardization" will kill server choices as there will be no discernable difference among them. Peep this list of servers:  DOE, SG3, SS2, GW2, RDSL, LB5.  That is diversity.  Very different servers, most of which required a download.  You seem to equate the abillity to switch between servers as giving people choices.  There are no servers to switch to.  The servers that are always up are unpopulated to the N-th degree.  The major servers are well attended and no one is going to be switching off from an active major campaign to an unpopulated "standard" server.  There are choices now of unpopulated servers that are not hard to get on to and the ability to flip back and forth among unpopulated servers is no choice at all.  What makes these unpopulated servers at least of some interest to some is the fact that they are different than a stock server.  Bonk has his Gravity Well with an unique map as well as his SFBOP mod server which is a crying shame that people do not go on.  These off-time servers receive as much traffic as they do which is not alot due to their uniqueness not their blandness.

Your arguments simply don't make sense in a game with such a small player base and that moves at the rhythm of major campaigns and is pretty much dead otherwise except for test servers.  You're welcome to stick up whatever server you want, but 3 or 4 "standardized" servers up at the same time will be meaningless as they will be basically the same and unpopulated.

[C-Los]

IMHO...

  It would be great to have a standard SL and mission pack, once they have been revised like I have read on other threads.
Besides making it easier for the player, Amins for servers wouldn't have to go thru the SL deciding what to keep and what not, just restrict whatever and the idea of allowing a limited # of DN's and BB's or whatever on the server at any one time takes away the work of the Admin from having to assign ships to certain people.
 
  Would also be nice to jump to another server right away, if the one everyone is playing goes down for some reason. No swapping out SL or DL'ing certain missions to play another.

  This could be done for a certain amount of time, 3 months...4...6.. Until such time as updates became available.


"Of course there would always be the speicalty server, the one where the Admin puts their life on hold to give life to a dream they've had"


 

[Lepton]

The capacity to jump from one server to another is a non-issue as no one does it.  Only major servers are attended. Minor servers are by definition weakly populated.  Whether it would be nice or not, or more convenient or not, has no standing when minor servers are not played on. We already have the idea being floated of a persistant stock server which I frankly think is silly and pointless.  What the hell else can you want?  For every server to be exactly the same??  No thanks.

[Hexx]

<rant>

 

I have a problem with the download allergic... its the internet man! That's what its for!

I'd bet you dollars to donuts that these same complainers run P2P software downloading/uploading mp3s and porn divXs all day and have no qualms about it...

I have some sympathy for those on dial-up that have no choice about it, but if you're just cheap... tfb...

We've created installers to make it easier, used outrageous compression to squish the files down as small as possible... (e.g. 512MB --> 46MB)

I mean, there's a new windows update more often than there is a new OP+...

I could rant more but I'll restrain myself...

</rant>

Hey!
Some us have NEVER uploaded a porn dvX...

[Gook]

OK, not enough consensus for a standard ship/fighterlist.

We can move on.

[Lepton]

No. You don't dictate what we do or don't discuss.  I invite discussion of this topic.  The putative standard is OP+ but I personally see no need for a standard. However, DIP is doing invaluable work and I certainly hope they are continuing with it.  The watchword is the development and improvement not a standard as any "standard" here will be evolving.  The very idea of a standard also goes against and constrains the unique constellation of servers that we have seen recently.  A standard is not needed.  What is needed is development that addresses fairness and balance in the D2 and this has been the work of many in the D2 community.  Fairness and balance are the standard, not a static shiplist.