Topic: Mirror PVP rules + VC's

[FPF-DieHard]

"The more you overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain."   

Agreed, this is getting over-complicated and ridiculous.

Stop being a Dizzy

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Ah yes keep it up with so many rules and we can call it Mirror Fizbin   

It really has gone too far when S'Cipio is supporting something simplier.  I mean I grew up playing SFB with him and I've never seen a more tenacious rules lawyer ever.  I nearly fainted when I saw him siding with simplicity.

[GDA-Agave]

Ok.   Here's my read on all the ideas so far.

Disengagement Rule Ideas

(1) I like the 3 minute/weapons fired no disengagement rule.   This would make pilots assess the situation quickly and eliminate the delaying mission tactic that is being used. (i.e.  hey George, keep his DN in mission while we run up this hex crap).   Normal disengage time penalties would still need to apply for strategic hex flipping reasons.

Diehard, your point about map sizes being used in missions is absurd.    How much room do you really need to use a run and gun tactic?     Your missing the main point there.  If you decide to stay and fight, then do so.   Adjust your tactics to the map size being used and do your thing.

(2) Dfly, your opposite side only disengagement is interesting, but I think ultimately it would just create flaming opportunites about if such and such pilot actually disengaged on the right side.    Very interesting idea though but let's use KISS thoery whenever we can.


PvP VC Point System

(1)  Ship class VC system.   Use the hull class to determine the PVP VCs gained in a live pilot kill.    Yes, I realized that this will force the admins to separate all the ships used into the different hull classes, but at least the work will be done all up front and not during the server.   IMHO certain speciality ships should be classified as one hull size larger to represent that they are highly prized kills to prevent your enemy from having that drone hex flipper, nasty heavy destroyer, etc., etc.,

                1     DD/FF hull class
                2     CL   (includes DD hull specialilty ships)
                3     CA   (includes CL speciality ships)
                4     BCH  (includes CA specialites, fast cruisers, etc.)
                5     DN   (including CA hull full carriers)

Now, I realize that the idea of what ships are considered speciality ships varies from pilot to pilot.  Admins, you can put the list open to discussion, but I think you will just have to ultimately decide yourselves where you want all the certain ships to be.   

The PVP VC point system based on this would be 1VC for an equal hull size kill, 2 VCs for killing the next hull class(CL killing CA), 4 VC pts for killing a ship 2 hull sizes bigger, and 8 VC pts for killing a ship 3 hull sizes bigger.   Easy to adjust pre-server by what the admins want.

For multiple pilot battles, you could always just say well 2xCAs killed a single DN pilot, 2 VCs total for the smaller ships killing the larger one just based on the difference.   This certainly would stick with the KISS theory, but might be very unpopular.   On computing VCs for non 1v1 PVP matches, I'm unsure how to proceed without adding complexity to it.

At least the end result would be here that the admins could see the kill post saying Fred's CLC killed George's BCH and know how to score the VC easily.   The pilots would only have to make sure they had the correct ships listed.

(2) Corbomite, your idea of challenges is good, but don't you always have the opportunity to call out your opponents.   The hull class system above would incorporate any kills made by challenge.

(3) PVP VCs by rank.   NO.  I got to agree with DH here.   Just because someone might be a nutter with tons of Prestige pts, doesn't make them a better PVP pilot and worth more VC points.   (take me for example    )

(4) More VC points for number of kills.  An interesting idea Hexx, but one that certainly seems like a nightmare to keep up with.   You would have timing issues with when kills were posted in the forums, counting errors.    Hell, I'm an accountant and this idea seems very evil to me.   Sorry.

(5)  My idea to add.    BOUNTIES!!  I have always liked being able to place bounties on my fellow pilots flying for the enemy.   If someone is being a pain in the butt, then stick a bounty on him worth 5 VCs so that everyone is out looking for him.   I have been very entertained by some of the reasons why certain pilots are always getting bounties place on them!! (   me included)   This adds some fun spice IMHO.   I would suggest making the bounty period only 2 or 3 days, not a week.    You could make the bounty VC only count for the initial kill of that pilot, or give the bounty VC bonus TO EACH AND EVERY PILOT who killed them during their bountied period.   HOW ABOUT SOME BOUNTIES!!



Agave

[GDA-S'Cipio]

WTF does rank have to do with PvP prowess?   might as well use shoe size for your descripter.

Not a thing.  Nor was my suggestion intended to assume that it would.  It was intended to give more VCs for killing those who are spending more time working against your empire, and to assure that the newer/more casual players had a chance to get their feet wet before others went gunning for them, avoiding your complaint that VCs for every kill penalized newbies.


I don't think pilot quality should be determinate for VCs.  First off, how do you measure such a thing objectively?  And second, the object for everyone should be to get better.  If your VCs get adjusted based upon how "good" you are, then what point in getting "better" than your opponent so you can beat him?

-S'Cipio

[Kzinbane]

I must say I like the idea of some sort of incentive for people to fly a variety rather than as has been said: Buy the biggest baddest cheese machine they can afford".  I mean that's why the dread and BB restrictions are there.  In every server I've seen though with the restritions the heavy BC's or big CV"s just "become" the dreads and battleships of that server and everyone rushes to get the PP to buy one because that's what they'll likely be facing in P vs P.
I do tend to lean toward some restriction on escorts, carriers and drone ships.  I mean we're doing FED mirror not Mirak - so the trend of people to get into missile boats and play ersatz Mirak aught to be discouraged at least.  This should be phasers, photons and boarding parties fighting it out not sissy ass Mirak drones  .
As for the FF or DD zones (or whatever) why not use asteroid fields?  Just make a big "fence" of asteroid hexes around an area.  Nothing larger than a DD can go through, or no thing larger than a DD (or whatever) may fight in an asteroid hex - something like that?

Mirror 2 sounds like fun any way it goes.  If I win a Fed dies.  If I loose a fed dies.  I do like the sound of that!  Burger king Vs McDonnalds!!!

Kzinbane

[Hexx]

Actually the "CL" and smaller designate zones are Nebs
-The Big CV's are out,as is anything with more then 4 droneracks and escorts
I'm now thinking, waht with the snivelling of all of you that "it's too complicated"
(like DH can work with any concept involving numbers other than an hourly charge)
that
-the top 5/10 PVP kill pilots on the server will gain VP's.

I was also going to split the draft/ random assignment into 2 groups, consisting of hex flippers and the PVP
guys, but if J'inn has some other way that doesn't involve him profiting I'm all for it..

[ShadowLord]

Very interesting concepts being posted..  hope to hear what the final rules will be soon.
Is there an anticipated start up date for this server yet?
and I guess the final question is -- are you doing it via draft?

ShadowLord

[FPF-Tobin Dax]

K.I.S.S.  Keep It Simple S_______ (you fill in the blank   )

[FPF-DieHard]

TOO MANY RULES!!!!   Learn SOMETHING from our mistakes.

[Hexx]

TOO MANY RULES!!!!   Learn SOMETHING from our mistakes.

<snicker> afaic your biggest mistake was telling me you'd run this as long as I took care of the shiplist 



Sides I really (atm) like the idea of the top 5 PVP killers splitting up some VC's
it amuses me for some reason.

[Dfly]

that 3 minute get out or die rule i proposed does not have to be 3 minutes.  I only used the 3 minutes for the biggest map.  I actually would rather suggest a 1 minute or  2 minute, and like someone suggested, if you fire, you stay.... so here would be my re-suggestion:

"At the start of any PvP mission, you have a maximum of 2 minutes to leave the hex.  If you fire weapons of any sort other than a probe for information, you are bound to the fight and may not disengage.  If you have not disengaged by the 2 minute time, you are bound to the fight and may not disengage."

This way, in a 2v1, the 1 has time to assess his situation and get out if warranted(so do the 2 if deemed appropriate).  In a 2v2 or 1v1, same thing.

Would this be more acceptable?

[FPF-DieHard]

No, I'll not play on a server with such a rule.

[FPF-Tobin Dax]

I really was looking forward to some fed vs. fed fun, but I'm figuring based on the way it's shaping up that I'll be taking a little time off.

[Dfly]

I really was looking forward to some fed vs. fed fun, but I'm figuring based on the way it's shaping up that I'll be taking a little time off.

then post some suggestions as to how you feel it could be improved.

[FPF-DieHard]

I really was looking forward to some fed vs. fed fun, but I'm figuring based on the way it's shaping up that I'll be taking a little time off.

then post some suggestions as to how you feel it could be improved.

Below are my suggested PvP VC rules . . .

[Green]

(3)Just because someone might be a nutter with tons of Prestige pts, doesn't make them a better PVP pilot and worth more VC points.   (take me for example    )

I thought he did ... thus why I believe it is a good idea



But overall ... the rules are getting more convoluted then the code that is used in the software   You sure you don't want to reign them in Hexx?  I'll play, no matter what you decide.  But simplicity does have it's virtues.

[FPF-Tobin Dax]

I really was looking forward to some fed vs. fed fun, but I'm figuring based on the way it's shaping up that I'll be taking a little time off.

then post some suggestions as to how you feel it could be improved.

 

Actually I have if you want to chase them down and I have also sent out a handful of PMs.

[Dfly]

NP Tobin, just never like to see anyone in this community not feel like they want to fly is all.

[Hexx]

Although I must admit I'm *somewhat* dissapointed with the number of PM's received claiming how
PVP VC's will ruin hte game -realy I think alot of people just use the words" I really don't care if we win or lose"
I have actually decided it's because all of you fear me in PVP.

So that's OK.

Current PVP rules are as follows.

VP's awarded for top 5 pilots on the server.
Only 1v1 (or 1v2,1v3) missions count.
No mission where you have a wingman (even if they don't fire) counts towards your total.
No Mission where you are in a DN will count. (killing a DN with a lesser ship does count)
(killing DH in a DN counts bigtime)
VP total is yet to be determined, but will be based so that having the 2 and 3 best pilots will be
equal to/slightly better than having the top pilot. Having 1 and 4 will of course be better than 2 & 3.

Disengagment Rule

Only no disengagement rule will apply to defenders when protecting a base or planet.
-They will not be permitted to leave the map until the base is destroyed/planet is capped.
There will likely be a VP penalty attached to leaving after the base is destroyed/planet capped.

This (very simple rule, even if you are a product of the NJ public school system) demonstrates that
A) You can really only pin someone against something they have to defend.
B) Even if masslvely outgunned, you're still expected to "do something"

[FPF-DieHard]

This (very simple rule, even if you are a product of the NJ public school system) demonstrates that
A) You can really only pin someone against something they have to defend.
B) Even if masslvely outgunned, you're still expected to "do something"

Too easy to abuse.   

PvP was more fun before VCs were attached, people tried a lot harder.   I rember being able to bag 10 C7s on a server back in the day, now everyone (myself included) fly so fricking carefully that Capital ship PvP is dull. Who can blaim people for this?  It is the responsible way to fly a team's asset, but is still is dull.

This is supposed to be a fun server, make a rule set that will promote fun and not a dick-meassuring contest. 

PvP in D2 is inherently unfair, to attach points to these engagments is silly.  bragging right is enough, especially when killing hexx.

PS.   next time I's involved with a campaing that has VCs for bagging capital ships, there will be VCs for chasing them off as well provided the number of players is equal.   Storm Season 2 offered points fo chasing DNs off in even-numbered battles and this forced capital ships to engage. 

IMHO, if a DN is worth 3 to kill it should be worth 2 to chase off in an even-numbered engagement (or something similar).