Topic: Just curious, How many people like OOB?

[Hexx]

Actually I honestly don't think either OOB or Non OOB has hurt worse.
People who liked small ships and *some* realism got fed up that anyone who put the hours in had a BB (or three)
People got fed up when everyone could afford a BCH, and had a BCH, and then some new player signed on in a CL.
And of course people got fed up when races with droners managed to race around the map in 2 minutes missions.

I personally very much like the idea that if a DN is destroyed, that side suffers. It adds (imho) a little exceitement and interest to the game.
Having 3 DN's/side no matter what seems kinda really,really stupid to me.
(But hey, if YOU think it's a good idea it doesn't mean I think you're stupid too, just probably)

The problem really is that the general shiplists of the Various Empires are too unbalanced against the "non traditinal opponent"

[FPF-DieHard]

 

I personally very much like the idea that if a DN is destroyed, that side suffers. It adds (imho) a little exceitement and interest to the game.
Having 3 DN's/side no matter what seems kinda really,really stupid to me.
(But hey, if YOU think it's a good idea it doesn't mean I think you're stupid too, just probably)

The problem really is that the general shiplists of the Various Empires are too unbalanced against the "non traditinal opponent"

What he said.

[GDA-S'Cipio]

Actually I honestly don't think either OOB or Non OOB has hurt worse.
People who liked small ships and *some* realism got fed up that anyone who put the hours in had a BB (or three)
People got fed up when everyone could afford a BCH, and had a BCH, and then some new player signed on in a CL.
And of course people got fed up when races with droners managed to race around the map in 2 minutes missions.

I personally very much like the idea that if a DN is destroyed, that side suffers. It adds (imho) a little exceitement and interest to the game.
Having 3 DN's/side no matter what seems kinda really,really stupid to me.
(But hey, if YOU think it's a good idea it doesn't mean I think you're stupid too, just probably)

The problem really is that the general shiplists of the Various Empires are too unbalanced against the "non traditinal opponent"

Something is wrong here.  Hexx is making sense, and we all know that never happens.

One side being without a key ship after they lose it is what adds a lot of spice to the D2 for me.  That does make the players in key ships more cautious, but as Kroma said I see that as a benefit.  With the disengagement rule, if a key ship runs from opposition all the time then it is as good as dead.  It won't be doing anything important.

-S'Cipio

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

One side being without a key ship after they lose it is what adds a lot of spice to the D2 for me.  That does make the players in key ships more cautious, but as Kroma said I see that as a benefit.  With the disengagement rule, if a key ship runs from opposition all the time then it is as good as dead.  It won't be doing anything important.

-S'Cipio

Would a super low ship replacement value add any spice for you Scippy?, I could see that as a way to achieve the same thing without limiting what could be flown.  Lose your DN and your in a frigate, due to your captain's incompetence.  Might keep the numbers of big ships down on a server, especailly if the larger boats were priced high.  You could even start players off with a decent chunk of PP so that even casual players could get a fairly large ship, but it would hurt if they lost it.

[Kroma BaSyl]

One side being without a key ship after they lose it is what adds a lot of spice to the D2 for me.  That does make the players in key ships more cautious, but as Kroma said I see that as a benefit.  With the disengagement rule, if a key ship runs from opposition all the time then it is as good as dead.  It won't be doing anything important.

-S'Cipio

Would a super low ship replacement value add any spice for you Scippy?, I could see that as a way to achieve the same thing without limiting what could be flown.  Lose your DN and your in a frigate, due to your captain's incompetence.  Might keep the numbers of big ships down on a server, especailly if the larger boats were priced high.  You could even start players off with a decent chunk of PP so that even casual players could get a fairly large ship, but it would hurt if they lost it.

Sounds great, but that scheme has never worked.

[el-Karnak]

There's nothing wrong with cheese. It just needs to be priced appropriately in the shipyard.

That's a silly way to control cheese, all that does is limit access to the nutters.

Silly Feddie.    Don't ya know how to modify a player's account to bump up their PP yet? 

If a RM wants to waste BP on cheese ships instead of BCHs, DNs then that's their prerogative.

As for nutters getting good ships...gee if they can pile up mucho PPs to get their own special ship without RM sugar-daddy help then it sounds like they earned it to me.   

[FPF-DieHard]

One side being without a key ship after they lose it is what adds a lot of spice to the D2 for me.  That does make the players in key ships more cautious, but as Kroma said I see that as a benefit.  With the disengagement rule, if a key ship runs from opposition all the time then it is as good as dead.  It won't be doing anything important.

-S'Cipio

It is kinda funny, look at the Attrition rate of Big Iron on the GW series.  How many big ships still died though they are being cautious? 

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Would a super low ship replacement value add any spice for you Scippy?, I could see that as a way to achieve the same thing without limiting what could be flown.  Lose your DN and your in a frigate, due to your captain's incompetence.  Might keep the numbers of big ships down on a server, especailly if the larger boats were priced high.  You could even start players off with a decent chunk of PP so that even casual players could get a fairly large ship, but it would hurt if they lost it.

Sounds great, but that scheme has never worked.

Was there a technical problem I'm not aware of?  Can't recall a server set up like that, either was a long time ago, or I wasn't on it. 

You could even price down some of the better line light cruisers so no one would be totally left out in the cold if you wanted.  Say the CLC, CWLP, MCC, D5L, etc

[FPF-DieHard]

How much lower can light cruisers get?   They are practically free now.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

How much lower can light cruisers get?   They are practically free now.

Perhaps too cheap in some instances.  You would price up the specialty ships and keep the line ships and command variants cheaper.  That way losing a line ship wouldn't cramp the PP much, but losing specialty ships or big guns would put a hurt on ya.  I'm thinking like 20k for a drone boat, and so on, but starting players with about 20k so that they could buy a specialty ship early, but it would hurt to replace em.  If you don't give a big chunk of PP up front you'd keep the casual players out in the cold.

[Kroma BaSyl]

Would a super low ship replacement value add any spice for you Scippy?, I could see that as a way to achieve the same thing without limiting what could be flown.  Lose your DN and your in a frigate, due to your captain's incompetence.  Might keep the numbers of big ships down on a server, especailly if the larger boats were priced high.  You could even start players off with a decent chunk of PP so that even casual players could get a fairly large ship, but it would hurt if they lost it.

Sounds great, but that scheme has never worked.

Was there a technical problem I'm not aware of?  Can't recall a server set up like that, either was a long time ago, or I wasn't on it. 

You could even price down some of the better line light cruisers so no one would be totally left out in the cold if you wanted.  Say the CLC, CWLP, MCC, D5L, etc

Sorry Chuut, not sure what planet you have been living on for the last 5 years, but the PP pricing methodl has been proven to be an ineffective method of cheese control that heavily favors nutters to the exculsion of casual players. If you think it is that great though, put up a server and see how many people fly it.

[FireSoul]

I like OoB. I like the idea if I kill a OoB ship player, I know that it shouldn't be coming back. It's a worthwhile effort type of situation.

.. it makes you feel like the opponent is a PRIZE.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Sorry Chuut, not sure what planet you have been living on for the last 5 years, but the PP pricing methodl has been proven to be an ineffective method of cheese control that heavily favors nutters to the exculsion of casual players. If you think it is that great though, put up a server and see how many people fly it.

Don't think I've ever seen one in which a lost DN got you down to frigate/lt. cruiser in a heartbeat.  As for favoring nutters, likely, a very valid point, then again all that effort should be worth something.  There may be some ways around this, have to get my head working on it though.

I'm just offering up ideas, though Kroma, take em or leave em not matter what planet you are on  .  As for the designing of my own server it might just happen, if Hexx can do one......why not me.......   I guarentee one thing if I do, will be something quite different as I think I'm ready to try something beyond standard operating procedures.  If I do hope you will at least try it out, even if you think you will hate it.

[Kroma BaSyl]

Don't think I've ever seen one in which a lost DN got you down to frigate/lt. cruiser in a heartbeat.  As for favoring nutters, likely, a very valid point, then again all that effort should be worth something.  There may be some ways around this, have to get my head working on it though.

I'm just offering up ideas, though Kroma, take em or leave em not matter what planet you are on  .  As for the designing of my own server it might just happen, if Hexx can do one......why not me.......   I guarentee one thing if I do, will be something quite different as I think I'm ready to try something beyond standard operating procedures.  If I do hope you will at least try it out, even if you think you will hate it.

Pricing schemes have been tried in the past, and have always failed to limit the total amount of cheese on the board. They also heavily favor nutters to the exclusion of casual players. That is just the nature of the beast. About the only think pricing schemes are good for is limiting drones, which I am fairly certian you are not in favor of.

Doing something "different" is welcome (although you have yet to propose anything truely different), but their is no standard operating procedure.

I will probably play any server you put up regardless of the settings, however, I am unlikely to treat it as a serious server that I invest a lot of time in if I can see clearly that the settings will lead to a cheese fest.

As many people have said here already, I prefer a D2 that is a "Campaign" with meaningful team based strategic objectives. One where team assests and resources are limited and actively managed, as opposed to a "Server" where anything goes. I like the simulated econ you get with an OOB and what it adds to the "Campaign". 

[el-Karnak]

Sorry Chuut, not sure what planet you have been living on for the last 5 years, but the PP pricing methodl has been proven to be an ineffective method of cheese control that heavily favors nutters to the exculsion of casual players. If you think it is that great though, put up a server and see how many people fly it.

Au contraire, mon chere Gorn. Relatively speaking, SS2 had pretty good participation rate and was a competitive dyna even though I thought the restricted ship classes were a little cheap and it turned into a BCV fest; BCH fest for ISC cuz the I-BCV was useless flea-trap that's not worth the BCH cost-like shipyard price tag.  I liked the way Jeff was starting to group small-time CVs into the NCA class.

I would setup the shipyard costs like this:

Shipyard Costs
Hull Type              Class Type         Heavy Cruiser Cost Multiplier               Restricted Ship Class
DN                           BATTLESHIP                  40                                                    YES
DN                           DREADNOUGHT              15                                                    YES
CV                           CARRIER                        10                                                    YES
CA                           HEAVY_BATTLECRUISER   5                                                      NO
CA,CL                       NEW_HEAVY_CRUISER     4                                                      NO
CA                           HEAVY_CRUISER              1                                                      NO
CL                           LIGHT_CRUISER             0.75                                                    NO
FF, F                        WAR_DESTROYER         0.40                                                    NO
FF, CL                      DESTROYER                  0.25                                                    NO
FF                           FRIGATE                       0.10                                                    NO
F                             FREIGHTER                 0.075                                                    NO
SB                           STARBASE                      20                                                    NO
BT                          BATTLE_STATION           12                                                     NO
BS                          BASE_STATION                 8                                                     NO
*(eg. Tugs)             SPECIAL                        6.5                                                     YES

Restricted class basically means the ships of this class have been purposely priced out of the reach of casual players. They would have to have it assigned by the race leaders. The amount of restricted class ships available for assignment for a particular race is governed by Build Points (BPs), each BP is worth a pre-set amount of PPs, as determined by how many economic assets a race has for a given round. Lots of things you can do with this shipyard cost model. The so-called cheese ships like droners could be assigned as NCA class making them 4 times the cost of a line CA. For example, a K-DWD costs 4 times as much as a K-D7W or a F-NCD+ costs 4 times as much as a F-CB. Lose that droner and it will hurt PP account wise. It also more properly represents their specialty status. Personally, if I can run a mission in a F-CB close to the time of a F-NCD+ then I'm keeping the F-CB cuz I can lose 4 of them for every F-NCD+ lost. Plus, F-CB is more PvP capable ship.

In addiition, if a nutter can pile up enough PP to get their own restricted class ship then they have basically earned it. I have never understood this "punish-the-nutter" mentality versus "leaving the nutter alone and give more opportunities to the casual player" mentality. When OOB goes OTT then you are basically punishing the nutters. Going after nutters is like an Airline company taking away all the frequent-flyer programs from its best customers and slapping them with a surcharge for all the ailine miles they logged. How long will that airline stay in business, ya think?!

I also mentioned making the dyna more syngernistic between the shipyard, shiplist and missions. Something that DIP took a stab at but failed to due to lack of techie help.  Basically, Restricted Class ships also get a more nasty time in the EEK missions by design. The EEK missions will pick on the Restricted Class ships to make the mission more harder. Eg:  BBs, DNs, BCHs face an extra enemy AI in EEK Patrols. This helps stop the cake-walk missions for players flying these kind of ships and it encourages that these players find an escorting player in a non-Restricted Class ships so the escort can draft an easier mission. Et voila, this EEK feature in conjuction with the disengagment rule for PvP has the heavy iron ships flying on the dyna with escorts, which is exactly how it should be.

[Kroma BaSyl]

Au contraire, mon chere Gorn. Relatively speaking, SS2 had pretty good participation rate and was a competitive dyna even though I thought the restricted ship classes were a little cheap and it turned into a BCV fest; BCH fest for ISC cuz the I-BCV was useless flea-trap that's not worth the BCH cost-like shipyard price tag.  I liked the way Jeff was starting to group small-time CVs into the NCA class.

Thanks for making my point Karnak. I quit SS2 after the 4th week for the most part because it had turned into a DN, CV, BCH fest. The high cost of ships on that server did nothing to curb their usage. Thus pricing is an ineffective means to get the ship mixture on a server that I prefer. Plain and simple.

In addiition, if a nutter can pile up enough PP to get their own restricted class ship then they have basically earned it. I have never understood this "punish-the-nutter" mentality versus "leaving the nutter alone and give more opportunities to the casual player" mentality.

There is no punish the nutter mentality except in your own head. It is simply a make the game excessible to all players mentality.

When OOB goes OTT then you are basically punishing the nutters.

This is a completely false statment. There is no proof that OOT OOB hurts nutters any more than it would hurt casual players. On an OOB server nutters still end up with the restricted ships because the team knows that those limited resources are put to best use in the hands of the players that will be on the most.

You are confusing the fact that the nutter nolonger gets to spend his PP in the game engine with the fact that restricted ships tend to go to players with prestige.

[Capt Jeff]

So, how about a little of both?

Let's have a example here.....

Say the server allows for 2 DNs, 3 BCH's, and 2 specialty ships to be online at one time.

Have build periods, depending on campaign lengh of say 1 week for longer ones, and half week for shorter ones.

If a DN, BCH, or specialty ship is lost, that side loses that ship until the next build period.

So, if you lose a DN, you now can only have 1 on at a time until the next build.

That side is charged a set amount of VC's to replace the dead ship at the end of each cycle.

So, as long as above ships are cheap enough......

1.  Anyone can fly above ships if there is a open slot.
2.  The loss of one of those ships affects the campaign as you can not field as many at a time.  (makes killing them worth something)
3.  VC cost to the losing side to replace lost ships.


Just my .02

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Pricing schemes have been tried in the past, and have always failed to limit the total amount of cheese on the board. They also heavily favor nutters to the exclusion of casual players. That is just the nature of the beast. About the only think pricing schemes are good for is limiting drones, which I am fairly certian you are not in favor of.

Yes various pricing schemes have bee tried but perhaps not all.  And if you did have unlimited availability I could see some price increase on drones being acceptable, that never bothered me much except where they were very heavily overpriced and not much pp could be made with mediums and you would lose money on fast ones.  Giving drone boats and carriers a big BPV increase but allowing for full reloads might be interesting to try.

Doing something "different" is welcome (although you have yet to propose anything truely different), but their is no standard operating procedure.

Not on this thread, as I was borrowing the OOB control idea from SFC3 where they managed to make it work to the satisfaction of most, but I have done so elsewhere.

I will probably play any server you put up regardless of the settings, however, I am unlikely to treat it as a serious server that I invest a lot of time in if I can see clearly that the settings will lead to a cheese fest.

 

couldn't ask for more, same as I looked at the GW series after the OOB was added after GW1, and while I've played a fair amount less than usual I have had great fun on those

As many people have said here already, I prefer a D2 that is a "Campaign" with meaningful team based strategic objectives. One where team assests and resources are limited and actively managed, as opposed to a "Server" where anything goes.

I agree with that statement 110%  I just see a different balance as being able to preserve this.  Love ideas like Secret VCs that encourage strategy beyond trench warfare, a more interesting map that opens up stategic options you dont see with straight and uniform borders, etc.  I see limiting online numbers of capital ships as a limit on reasources, and perhaps some minor regulations that would favor line ships over specialty ones.  

As a side note, I'd love to strip down the BCVs of all races or just get rid of them as I think a BCV should not be a BCH plus fighters, but rather a ship that with fighters was roughly equal to a BCH.  Then it would become a choice whether to fly a BCH or a BCV rather than a given that the BCV would be superior in all things and the defacto choice.  

I like the simulated econ you get with an OOB and what it adds to the "Campaign". 

That part I dislike, would perfer something in the map setup with trade routes of open hexes with high econs to determine production via shipyards rather than the holding of planets being the sole determinant of what is able to be built.  What would be cool is if there is a way to allow for certain missions to reduce econ value instead of DV, or perhaps have some missions do both.  Would open up the field for commerce raiding and "U-boat" warfare.  

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

So, how about a little of both?

Let's have a example here.....

Say the server allows for 2 DNs, 3 BCH's, and 2 specialty ships to be online at one time.

Have build periods, depending on campaign lengh of say 1 week for longer ones, and half week for shorter ones.

If a DN, BCH, or specialty ship is lost, that side loses that ship until the next build period.

So, if you lose a DN, you now can only have 1 on at a time until the next build.

That side is charged a set amount of VC's to replace the dead ship at the end of each cycle.

So, as long as above ships are cheap enough......

1.  Anyone can fly above ships if there is a open slot.
2.  The loss of one of those ships affects the campaign as you can not field as many at a time.  (makes killing them worth something)
3.  VC cost to the losing side to replace lost ships.


Just my .02

not a bad propossal Jeff, but it fails to adress one of my biggest problems with assigned non-replaceable ships, that is the non "ace" factor.

What I call a "non-ace"  is a player casual or nutter who doesn't consider themselves overly skilled at pvp, lets call him "X".  Well X really would really like to fly a DN but is uncomfortable doing so because he doesn't want to lose the team's asset.  He could fly it behind the lines, but knows that would defeat the purpose of it.  So he puts away his chance at personal enjoyment and challange for the sake of the team, flying his non-OOB or lesser-OOB ship, often meating opposition pilots in the Big Iron ships and having to run from them due to not having much chance in the matchup.

X therefore doesn't get to fly the ship he would like to, nor does he get the chance to fight anyone on equal terms who is not in a non-OOB ships.  His loses more confidence in his pvp skills and his opportunity to practice them in even matchups is lessened.  The elitism of the assigned non-replacable OOB ships, (compounded in my view by trench warfare setups) therefore causes them to lose interest in the game, play less enthuastically, play less time, and perhaps grow frustrated and leave.

[Kroma BaSyl]

So, how about a little of both?

Let's have a example here.....

Say the server allows for 2 DNs, 3 BCH's, and 2 specialty ships to be online at one time.

Have build periods, depending on campaign lengh of say 1 week for longer ones, and half week for shorter ones.

If a DN, BCH, or specialty ship is lost, that side loses that ship until the next build period.

So, if you lose a DN, you now can only have 1 on at a time until the next build.

That side is charged a set amount of VC's to replace the dead ship at the end of each cycle.

So, as long as above ships are cheap enough......

1.  Anyone can fly above ships if there is a open slot.
2.  The loss of one of those ships affects the campaign as you can not field as many at a time.  (makes killing them worth something)
3.  VC cost to the losing side to replace lost ships.


Just my .02

Keeping the OOB as with GW4 but allowing transfers of ships more freely, allows for the exact same thing.