Topic: Have to commend Dib

[Braxton_RIP]

I blew you up a couple times, and ran you off some as well, but you kept coming back.

Takes a person with some courage to countinually face a DNL and not run.

So sir, I saulte you.

[SkyFlyer]

Especially in one mission with such a great heavy cruiser escort such as myself.

[[KBF]MuadDib]

Especially in one mission with such a great heavy cruiser escort such as myself.

thx...with no vc's really makes it easy to treat this like gsa...dont know why you guys feel so attached to your ships with so many more to buy in the yards...and come on versus the 10/20 time limit for disengagement...im so going for the 5/10 in most cases...

but no more alliance who want to run around and play tag get my ships anymore...so if you see me go boom about 10 minutes into a match when i could have ran 3-5 missions...you will know why...and not many get me before i self destruct...have to be quick or gang me...to actually kill me...for what its worth...

and i so loved being the mouse that i am...dodging your drafts to gang me out of hexes...got to be quicker...

[Mr.Bad151]

err.. what's the point of self destructing?  I noticed you did that during the battle we had.  You obviously put up a fight during our battle, and I thought you deserved to disengage.. if you lived that long..   I was rather surprised you SD.  I fought another pilot today and the battle lasted about the same length of time.. and he managed to disengage.  I don't see any rule on a time limit for disengaging.  It does say fight (which you did) or flight.  I don't interpret that as fight to the death.. or leave immediately.

[Dfly]

I think his point is that he is using Vanilla ships, allowing him to return twice as fast to same hex, especially if he dies.  If his time in a mission vs PvP runs longer than Xamount of minutes, he SDs because he can run say 3 or more missions vs ai within that timeframe.  And with the SD in a Vanilla ship he can return to such said hex after a 15 min timeout.

[KBFLordKrueg]

err.. what's the point of self destructing?  I noticed you did that during the battle we had.  You obviously put up a fight during our battle, and I thought you deserved to disengage.. if you lived that long..   I was rather surprised you SD.  I fought another pilot today and the battle lasted about the same length of time.. and he managed to disengage.  I don't see any rule on a time limit for disengaging.  It does say fight (which you did) or flight.  I don't interpret that as fight to the death.. or leave immediately.

From The Rules post, Mr Bad:

3)    DISENGAGEMENT RULE:

Def. - Ship of the Line - Any ship in the shiplist with a "v" at the front of it's name.  For example.  F-vCA.  If it doesn't have a "v" it is NOT a Line Ship.

FOR SHIPS OF THE LINE

- If you disengage from a battle with a live enemy player, you cannot take missions in that hex for 10 game turns.

- If your ship is destroyed by a live enemy player, you cannot take missions in that hex for 5 game turns.

FOR ALL OTHER SHIPS

- If you disengage from a battle with a live enemy player, you cannot take missions in that hex for 20 game turns.

- If your ship is destroyed by a live enemy player, you cannot take missions in that hex for 10 game turns.

IN GENERAL

There are no exemptions for the above two rules.  If you're stuck with a 1v3 or are forced to fly your FF against a BCH ... then the other side simply played their moves better.


By SDing he's allowed back in the hex in half the time. 
And ships are cheap...

[[KBF]MuadDib]

err.. what's the point of self destructing?  I noticed you did that during the battle we had.  You obviously put up a fight during our battle, and I thought you deserved to disengage.. if you lived that long..   I was rather surprised you SD.  I fought another pilot today and the battle lasted about the same length of time.. and he managed to disengage.  I don't see any rule on a time limit for disengaging.  It does say fight (which you did) or flight.  I don't interpret that as fight to the death.. or leave immediately.

ya darth and krueg got it...less time away from a certain hex if i die rather than disengage...and self destructing is just something ive always really done...i would rather sd then let anyone actually make the final blow...and if youre close enough and hurt enough...i might take you too...its happened...

[Mr.Bad151]

Sound like ships are WAY too cheap and the disengagement rule is too harsh, if someone is willing to SD to get around the disengagement rule.  Most battle SHOULD end in the disengagement of one side...  Currently blowing someone up is actually HELPING them.. by way of letting them return to that hex SOONER!? 

What kinda of screwy system are we using?!  I'm new to D2 but this seem so backarsewards it isn't funny!  I've seen peoples PP stockpiles and realized that I'd have to blow them up 50 times to make a dent in their PP.  Sure the current settings encourage PvP, but at the same time make it meaningless.  You can run missions twice as fast to flip hexes and earn about the same amount of PP (even with the PvP bonus).  When someone is willing to SD (killing his crew and distroying a hunk of his races economy) maybe its time to rethink the rules.

(Dib, I'm not insulting you or what you did, just dumbfounded by the rules...)

[Hexx]

Since technically when you blow someone's ship up they should have to
start a new account (being what dead and all) it's not really something
I'm worried about.

[FPF-DieHard]

Sound like ships are WAY too cheap and the disengagement rule is too harsh, if someone is willing to SD to get around the disengagement rule.  Most battle SHOULD end in the disengagement of one side...  Currently blowing someone up is actually HELPING them.. by way of letting them return to that hex SOONER!? 

What kinda of screwy system are we using?!  I'm new to D2 but this seem so backarsewards it isn't funny!  I've seen peoples PP stockpiles and realized that I'd have to blow them up 50 times to make a dent in their PP.  Sure the current settings encourage PvP, but at the same time make it meaningless.  You can run missions twice as fast to flip hexes and earn about the same amount of PP (even with the PvP bonus).  When someone is willing to SD (killing his crew and distroying a hunk of his races economy) maybe its time to rethink the rules.

(Dib, I'm not insulting you or what you did, just dumbfounded by the rules...)

We;'ve tried making PvP death punitive and it makes the server way too serious.    This is a game, needs to be fun.

[el-Karnak]

MILF

Stupid question time for the Frog.

What is MILF?

Is it the same thing as a MBA (Married But Available). *snicker*

[Braxton_RIP]

MILF

Stupid question time for the Frog.

What is MILF?

Is it the same thing as a MBA (Married But Available). *snicker*

Wow...........

Even I know what MILF means.  Ask SkyFlyer, I bet HE even knows. 

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

He-he.... watch 'American Pie'.....

"Hey, Stifler... you're Mom's hot!!"

[FPF-DieHard]

Mother I'd Like (to) Fondle

[Mr.Bad151]

Sound like ships are WAY too cheap and the disengagement rule is too harsh, if someone is willing to SD to get around the disengagement rule.  Most battle SHOULD end in the disengagement of one side...  Currently blowing someone up is actually HELPING them.. by way of letting them return to that hex SOONER!? 

What kinda of screwy system are we using?!  I'm new to D2 but this seem so backarsewards it isn't funny!  I've seen peoples PP stockpiles and realized that I'd have to blow them up 50 times to make a dent in their PP.  Sure the current settings encourage PvP, but at the same time make it meaningless.  You can run missions twice as fast to flip hexes and earn about the same amount of PP (even with the PvP bonus).  When someone is willing to SD (killing his crew and distroying a hunk of his races economy) maybe its time to rethink the rules.

(Dib, I'm not insulting you or what you did, just dumbfounded by the rules...)

We;'ve tried making PvP death punitive and it makes the server way too serious.    This is a game, needs to be fun.

Maybe you went too far.. You can't have PvP death be punitive AND have disengagement be punitive..

Personally, when I come out of a mission after having just spent 30 minutes blowing someone up and I look at their PP and realize I need to blow them up 50 more time to really make a difference.. the fun kinda drains away.  While the battles are fun.. the war suddenly looks rather depressing.  No matter how good I am or become, winning PvP battles are NEVER going to make a difference in the war.  They take too long and have far too little effect on anything.  I can win every battle but if I'm out numbered/outnuttered... I am going to lose the war. 

Take for example the Alliance in AtokII...  we could win every single PvP battle, but because we have fewer players/nutters,   we would lose the war.  Skill and strategy play a rather small part in who wins.  (sorry, I know skill/strategy should never be used in the same sentence as "alliance"    it was just an example)

Winning a PvP battle should have a significant effect on the tide of battle in a campaign.. otherwise you are just fighting glorified GSA battles...  Death in PvP battles SHOULD be punitive!  But its shouldn't be easy.  Getting the "kill" is a whole other skill. MOST battles should end in someone disengaging.

Right now the rule/settings favor the "nutters" so heavily it isn't funny.  Cheap ships, cheap repair, meaningless PvP death.. its a nutters paradise.  The side with the most nutters is going to win.. regardless of the balance of skill or strategy.  That actually makes it WORSE than GSA.. at least with a GSA battle I can say I won.  With the current settings I finish a PvP and realize I didn't win.. I lost.. I lost hexes..  The "win" I got in the PvP was actually self-defeating.  I allowed the enemy to return to the hex sooner..  I can't even say I've delayed his plans.. because if the battle takes longer than he wants.. he just Self destructs...

Quite literally I would have to kill some players 20+ times before I would even make a sizeable dent in their PP.  There are a few players I could blow up their CAs 20 times and they would still have enough PP to buy a DN.  This makes PvP battles totally meaningless in terms of the campaign.  About all a kill in a PvP battle does is give me bragging rights in the "kill" thread.  Heck, we could just all play GSA games and post our kills there and save the people working on the server/campaign a lot of work.

I'm not blaming the people who brought us the campaign... obviously the rules are pretty much what the community has suggested.  But is it REALLY what the community wants?  Is there no hope of finding a rule set/server settings somewhere between "too serious" and 'nutters paradise"?

[RFA-Wraith]

Why not increase the DV shift for the hex in PvP?

Instead of getting a 1 DV shift for winning a PvP, make it 2 or 5?

That will encourage people to fight to the death, and make an hours worth of battle worthwhile.

It will also make the defeated party think twice about returning to the same hex as they have just cost there side a huge
DV shift in that hex.

[KBFLordKrueg]

Sound like ships are WAY too cheap and the disengagement rule is too harsh, if someone is willing to SD to get around the disengagement rule.  Most battle SHOULD end in the disengagement of one side...  Currently blowing someone up is actually HELPING them.. by way of letting them return to that hex SOONER!? 

What kinda of screwy system are we using?!  I'm new to D2 but this seem so backarsewards it isn't funny!  I've seen peoples PP stockpiles and realized that I'd have to blow them up 50 times to make a dent in their PP.  Sure the current settings encourage PvP, but at the same time make it meaningless.  You can run missions twice as fast to flip hexes and earn about the same amount of PP (even with the PvP bonus).  When someone is willing to SD (killing his crew and distroying a hunk of his races economy) maybe its time to rethink the rules.

(Dib, I'm not insulting you or what you did, just dumbfounded by the rules...)

We;'ve tried making PvP death punitive and it makes the server way too serious.    This is a game, needs to be fun.

Maybe you went too far.. You can't have PvP death be punitive AND have disengagement be punitive..

Personally, when I come out of a mission after having just spent 30 minutes blowing someone up and I look at their PP and realize I need to blow them up 50 more time to really make a difference.. the fun kinda drains away.  While the battles are fun.. the war suddenly looks rather depressing.  No matter how good I am or become, winning PvP battles are NEVER going to make a difference in the war.  They take too long and have far too little effect on anything.  I can win every battle but if I'm out numbered/outnuttered... I am going to lose the war. 

Take for example the Alliance in AtokII...  we could win every single PvP battle, but because we have fewer players/nutters,   we would lose the war.  Skill and strategy play a rather small part in who wins.  (sorry, I know skill/strategy should never be used in the same sentence as "alliance"    it was just an example)

Winning a PvP battle should have a significant effect on the tide of battle in a campaign.. otherwise you are just fighting glorified GSA battles...  Death in PvP battles SHOULD be punitive!  But its shouldn't be easy.  Getting the "kill" is a whole other skill. MOST battles should end in someone disengaging.

Right now the rule/settings favor the "nutters" so heavily it isn't funny.  Cheap ships, cheap repair, meaningless PvP death.. its a nutters paradise.  The side with the most nutters is going to win.. regardless of the balance of skill or strategy.  That actually makes it WORSE than GSA.. at least with a GSA battle I can say I won.  With the current settings I finish a PvP and realize I didn't win.. I lost.. I lost hexes..  The "win" I got in the PvP was actually self-defeating.  I allowed the enemy to return to the hex sooner..  I can't even say I've delayed his plans.. because if the battle takes longer than he wants.. he just Self destructs...

Quite literally I would have to kill some players 20+ times before I would even make a sizeable dent in their PP.  There are a few players I could blow up their CAs 20 times and they would still have enough PP to buy a DN.  This makes PvP battles totally meaningless in terms of the campaign.  About all a kill in a PvP battle does is give me bragging rights in the "kill" thread.  Heck, we could just all play GSA games and post our kills there and save the people working on the server/campaign a lot of work.

I'm not blaming the people who brought us the campaign... obviously the rules are pretty much what the community has suggested.  But is it REALLY what the community wants?  Is there no hope of finding a rule set/server settings somewhere between "too serious" and 'nutters paradise"?

Well, we tried PvP kills being the only way of scoring, with no map VCs at all...
Players whined and complained about that, too...
No matter what, you can't make all the players happy all the time. 

[Dfly]

tue, no matter what the rule, not everyone will be happy.  I also am a PvPer, who ends up doing an awfull lot of hex flipping ( much more than I want to) due to the fact that PvP does not really help your side win.  Sure it helps push back a certain area for a very short time due to the enemy not flying there afterwards, but they can do many hex flipping right beside there or elsewhere.

1- I too would love to see a PvP cause a 5 pt shift.  You dont actually lose the whole hex, but you do lose a great part of it.  I know this second part I suggest will not go over well.

2-Fights, all PvP with no drops (God forbid someone would drop just because they got into a PvP and did not want to) are to the DEATH. or

3-All PvP kills means that that person must start a new account.  this one can suck very much for the guy who is not a nutter and has taken almost all his time building up enough to have a descent ship, only to lose it to a DN and start all over again.  this part I would not suggest if part #2 is in effect.

SO, in short, I would  love to see #1 in effect first.  #2 second. if not, then #3. on one of the next servers.  These are for suggestions and thoughts only, please add comments and input.

[Hexx]

Problem is for alot of the suggestions I *believe* you need a functional SQL server
or the source code.
Neither of which we have.

[Mr.Bad151]

I have a few suggestions.. I don't know if all of them are possible but most should be..

1. Make ships more expensive:  with current amount given for "vs. AI" missions, set DDs around 5k, CLs 10k, CAs 20k, BCHs 40k and DNs 80k.  Speciality ships IE maulers, drone cruisers, carriers; should be double this amount, so a D6D would run you 40k.  While this may seem high I have the lowest PP totals on the server at 60k (I have a new baby at home so don't get to play a lot) which would buy me 3 CAs..  There are some who could lose a DN then jump right back into a BCH.  160k for a CV sounds steep but it might start having people fly escort to such ships.  In SFB certain ships RARELY traveled without their escorts.. and only in the most dire of circumstances did they enter battle without them.. Ships like CVs, Maulers, Drone cruiser, even DNs to a large extent.  With ships this expensive getting blown up will set you back.. without taking you completely out of the game (although losing a CV could be crushing for a side.. which is the way is was during WWII)

2. Disengagement Rule:  If I remember correctly SFB had a disengagement rule that went something like.. You could not disengage until you were crippled or until you had scored internals on the enemy.  Something like that could be adopted.  No disengagement until you are crippled (less than 50% hull) or you had scored internals on the enemy.  If you disengage before then your ship is considered destroyed.. you have to SD your ship.  That includes running out of bounds for ANY reason.. accidental.. purpose.. or pushed out by a tractor beam!  The tractor beam part makes running the border even more dangerous.. for those who wish to run the border until they are crippled or manage to do internals then make a quick hop out of bounds.

There would be no time requirement for returning to a hex..because of the following

3.  Expensive repairs:  Repairs should be costly... repairing a ship costs.. and costs a LOT.  If repair costs were set to something like up to 50% of the purchase price.  So a CA 1 damage point away from distruction might cost 10k to repair.. while 10% damage might cost you 1-2k to repair.  This is why ships are allowed to disengage with no time restrictions.  A small ship might try flying around to tie up a larger ship, he can't disengage until he does internals OR until he is crippled.  Leaving the map crippled will cost him.. dearly.. not to mention how much he is risking just tieing up a larger ship.  Would you be willing to risk 5k possibly 10k (if destroyed) to tie up a CA for 30 minutes, with your measly CL? Probably not unless it was absolutely necessary.. which is the way it should be.  Remember speciality (cheese ships) are double that cost/risk!

4.  Huge PvP bonuses:  Destroying a players ships should get you a bonus of around 40% of the destroyed ships purchase price.  While even this might not cover your repair bill if you were very heavily damage.. you do get the satisfaction of knowing you just set one pilot back quite a bit.

While not all of these might be possible.. it might give someone an idea with something that is.  Or just a good idea in general.. hehe

Oh and by the way.. Deepstiking is the dumbest, most out of control thing I have seen.  It makes bases almost completely useless.  They aren't much more than convience stores as it is.. but with deepstrikes.. the only reason to place a base is to give the deepstrikers a target to distroy..        Deepstrikes should be limited to 5 hexes from allied space.. or 10 hexes from a base/planet.    I find it hard to believe that a ship would be able to fly 20 hex into enemy territory, past starbases, battlestation, planets, and listening posts to attack a base then suddenly get an AI draw.. where in the heck did those guys come from and now it makes even HARDER to believe its possible...  Limiting the range of Deepstrikes would allow some use of bases, strategy in placing bases and still let people have fun doing deepstrikes.

It would also allow rules that add a bit more "flavor" to races..  Like Roms could disengage from battles if they were caught deepstriking (the cripple/internal rule would still apply tho)... ISC could have their deep strike range increased to 10 hexes from an allied hexed.  Historically the ISC ships were designed to travel long distances and at high warp.. which allowed them to "police" the galaxy.

Forcing people to fight to the death is either pointless, as it would be currently, people are self destructing now as it is.. or to big a deterent to PvP.  Besides.. most battles wouldn't be fought to the death anyway.. Having to start a new account would be an even bigger deterent to PvP.. you would see a LOT more drops in PvP.

[Hexx]

Letsee

1) Uhmm No, really i don't want to have to run 135 missions or so againt the AI to
    be able to fly a BCH . I'm sure it sounds exciting , but I'd really rather not.
    The part about SFB is a <small> sorepoint with someppeople, as this isn't SFB, it's SFC
    Besides SFb has more than enough stupidity in it's background history/fleet makeup to eliminate it from any
    "we should do this beacause it happens in SFB"
    You also can't have people designated to "fly escort" as you can't ensure that they will be drafted.
    (I like the idea, and it's been sugegsted before, just with the games tech it's unworkable)

2) So after someone has flown 135 (or so) missions against the AI, bought themselves a BCH and found someone to
   escort them they gate drafted by two other players. Then their wing drops. Now they have to write off their ship?
   Again an idea that doesn't really contribute to people flying PVP

3) I don't feel like paying a few K for repairs because I got double tapped by an AI mauler in a bugged mission.

4) So say (all joking aside) I kill someone's BCH with mine, I now have to wait for him to accumulate another 40K pp
    before I can fight him again?
    The satisfaction is not (for me anyway) knowing that I caused someone to lose a ton of PP, it's knowing tha I beat
    them after hopefully a well played game on both sides.

- The problem with deepstrikes is to some degree an issue, problem is I (and some others here) are lazy. When
   Kruegy has his klinks avoid PVP and DS a base I don't want to have to try and figure out if it was 10 hexes behind the line
   or 11.

I'm also not sure about your last point- you want to force people away from PVP? Why? It's easy enough to avoid now if
you don't want to do it.

To me all your points are catering to the players who can spend 24/7 on  a server
When someone accumlates say a million pp (yes it's been done) the situation is still there, will
you advocate raising prices to 50 or 60K for a CA? All you do when you raise ship prices is make them available
to people who have the time to spend on the server.
And as for lowest PP totals on the server, you've got about 2x what I've got. 

[Dizzy]

Sound like ships are WAY too cheap and the disengagement rule is too harsh, if someone is willing to SD to get around the disengagement rule.  Most battle SHOULD end in the disengagement of one side...  Currently blowing someone up is actually HELPING them.. by way of letting them return to that hex SOONER!? 

Exactly. Stupid isnt it?

What kinda of screwy system are we using?!  I'm new to D2 but this seem so backarsewards it isn't funny!  I've seen peoples PP stockpiles and realized that I'd have to blow them up 50 times to make a dent in their PP.  Sure the current settings encourage PvP, but at the same time make it meaningless.  You can run missions twice as fast to flip hexes and earn about the same amount of PP (even with the PvP bonus).  When someone is willing to SD (killing his crew and distroying a hunk of his races economy) maybe its time to rethink the rules.

We have had rules in the past where it means something to keep your ship. Past servers have used multiple methods, expensive ships and severe ship loss penalties for losing them, contruction costs, so despite them being available in the yards, they must be built according to rules where build points are used and if 'x' amount are destroyed, bye bye. We have had penalty boxes where u lose a capital ship you cant fly another for 'x' amount of time and even setup half of a servers win requirement being based all on PvP kills. All this stuff isnt used this server. And the SD method of getting back into a hex benefits only one kind of player, the hex flipper. Where is the rule that benefits the PvP player?

[el-Karnak]

The arguments are sooo old, it's not even funny anymore.

People are so set in their ways now, that it's a complete waste of time to try and move them out of their respective PvP or nutter's paradise camps.

I certainly won't waste my time trying to . . .

If you don't like the server the way it is, then you can always run your own . . .

If you can't do that, then there are lotsa of other games to play. Some are better, some are worse.

About the only concrete fact you can make is that this SQL Server kit being broken has dragged on to long.  If it's not fixed this year, then I would fear for this game's viability for the next year.  The missions are getting better but still are not where they should be. SS2 still had the best quality mission pack ever and that dyna was 2 years ago.  AI stripping is not working very well, as far as I can tell, on AoTK2.  A lot of these problems have solutions in some mission packs, but most Admins. really don't know how to use them.

Most of these issues talked about in this thread arise from techie problems with the game. It's about time they got fixed and the admins. started making full use of the techie options available without bugging out the dyna in the process (ie. No SQL Server kit that works, invisible ION Storms, double weapons fire, AI stripping that largely does not work).

Fix the game software and then no one will be in a position to argue with how it works. For starters, we'd have multiple DV shifts for PvP wins in a hex. That will get rid of this disengagement rule nonsense once and for all. There will be less players arguing and less angst and that's always good for the game.....DOH!!! 

community self-

[FPF-DieHard]

We have had rules in the past where it means something to keep your ship. Past servers have used multiple methods, expensive ships and severe ship loss penalties for losing them, contruction costs, so despite them being available in the yards, they must be built according to rules where build points are used and if 'x' amount are destroyed, bye bye. We have had penalty boxes where u lose a capital ship you cant fly another for 'x' amount of time and even setup half of a servers win requirement being based all on PvP kills. All this stuff isnt used this server. And the SD method of getting back into a hex benefits only one kind of player, the hex flipper. Where is the rule that benefits the PvP player?

All those rules make the game too serious and suck the fun out of it.   We decided to go for a more laid-back server for a change because we had gone too far with rules and other sillyness on the other servers this year.

Yes, the SD method is stupid and bases are too easy to kill.   We will address this for the next campaign.

[Dizzy]

I have a few suggestions.. I don't know if all of them are possible but most should be..

1. Make ships more expensive: 

No. Lousy control method. Screws casual players and makes losing a ship for a nutter meaningless. Cant ever do this. AOTK2 does this and it is simply outrageous in the extreme. I protest.

2. Disengagement Rule:  If I remember correctly SFB had a disengagement rule that went something like.. You could not disengage until you were crippled or until you had scored internals on the enemy.

Current rule lets u SD upon start of the mission just to be able to manipulate the disengagement rule on this server to help benefit you to flip hexes faster. Ridiculous and outrageous.

A little history, the disengage rule came about one day when a Klink DN trying to defend a hex ran into 2x Mirak DF's. One DF would tie up the DN for 20 minutes whgile the othe DF ran 15 or so missions and flipped the hex. When the DN came out of the mission, rinse and repeat. With the rule, it became possible for the DN to run the first DF out and then to engage the other DF and also run him out long enough for the DN to run some of his/her own missions to reinforce the hex. I'd like to see the Disengagement rule done away with.

So the disengage rule came into being. However, the down side is that it favors hex flipping and limits PvP. The dynamic here is this server is setup to favor hex flipping There is no control factor for ship losses or VC's to affect the server results, so it is meaningless to kill or lose a ship this server. I dislike this if they meant something other than bragging rights, I'd have been posting each of my nine kills and one loss.

But the way I see it as in the example above, the Mirak DF's can simply move to another hex and flip it. What's the difference in which hex it is? If PvP losses/wins resulted in a 2+ DV shift, hey great! Then the DISENGAGMENT RULE COULD GO BYE BYE!

3.  Expensive repairs:  
 

No. Poor control method because it penalizes players who know not how to reinforce shields and get beat up by AI. Again, it favors the nutter rather than thge casual player.

4.  Huge PvP bonuses:  

Prestige awards and ship cost... There is a dynamic for ship loss you need to understand. One is when u lose a ship u get a smaller ship. This is a fair and just penalty for getting killed. However, getting a new ship depends on several factors:

Cost: If you are a nutter, ignore this penalty. So we cant use this method as it isnt fair for casual players. All ships should cost 1 prestige point.

Time: This depends on two things, how often good ships show up in the yards and how often the yards cycle. Time is a good control factor as long as getting a good ship doesnt take too long, however, there should be at least a few decent ships you should be able to get to tide you over for the one you really want.

Oh and by the way.. Deepstiking is the dumbest, most out of control thing I have seen.  It makes bases almost completely useless.  

I like your idea of a maximum deepstrike range but it is unenforceable. I believe this is a server design issue. Admins need to setup servers so SB's should only be used deep in home space and be indestructible. Bats and BS's should be set to pop... The time to buy it, place it and kill it equals out. Makes deepstriking and the threat of running into PvP and not being able to split, exciting.

A little history, Deepstrike rule came into being on the IDSL server. A certain hydran player, I won't name names (Bearslayer or DM6), but this person ran deep behind enemy lines to go on a base busting spree. Time and again he was drafted, but it was difficult to do so. Once he came out of mission he would hop into another hex and quickly take another mission before we could move in to draft. It became necessary for 6 players to surround him so he had to draft someone. Once he did, he would simply disengage rinse and repeat, perfectly legal under current and all past server rules. So then and there five minutes later, the deepstrike rule went into being written something like this:  if you were drafted behind enemy lines, you have to stay and fight and if u disengage u must SD.

I think this is fair.

It would also allow rules that add a bit more "flavor" to races..  Like Roms could disengage from battles if they were caught deepstriking (the cripple/internal rule would still apply tho)... ISC could have their deep strike range increased to 10 hexes from an allied hexed.  Historically the ISC ships were designed to travel long distances and at high warp.. which allowed them to "police" the galaxy.

SG4 server had this. I dont think it was ever actually used tho. The circumstance never presented itself to be used afaik but it was a neat idea.

Basically, we have 2 camps. Hex flippers and PvPers. Both come in flavors of casual to nutter. They all need something to do on a server.This server offers fun for PvPers and nothing more. Hex flippers may mean something... but I find the rule about who has the most color on the map confusing. So basically this is just a fun server. Although I find some of the rules ridiculous on AOTK2, it's about time we had a fun server to blow off some steam and be civil towards one another.

[FPF-DieHard]

I like your idea of a maximum deepstrike range but it is unenforceable. I believe this is a server design issue. Admins need to setup servers so SB's should only be used deep in home space and be indestructible. Bats and BS's should be set to pop... The time to buy it, place it and kill it equals out. Makes deepstriking and the threat of running into PvP and not being able to split, exciting.

A

yes, this is a server desgin issue.  The next rev of missions will make this MUCH more "realistic" and less stupid.

[el-Karnak]

I like your idea of a maximum deepstrike range but it is unenforceable. I believe this is a server design issue. Admins need to setup servers so SB's should only be used deep in home space and be indestructible. Bats and BS's should be set to pop... The time to buy it, place it and kill it equals out. Makes deepstriking and the threat of running into PvP and not being able to split, exciting.

A

yes, this is a server desgin issue.  The next rev of missions will make this MUCH more "realistic" and less stupid.

You may want to fix your issues with double-weapons fire, AI stripping, and invisible ION Storms, first. And, stop adding buggy features. Don't want them, don't need them.

It's fix the bug first and THEN, and only THEN, add the features.  It took about 3 years to finally get rid of the CTDing missions off most of the dynas. Before this, I would not even consider playing on a dyna that did not use EEK missions cuz I really don't like CTDing all the time.  It's quite annoying . . . just like these un-seen ION storms . . .and how come every PvP mission I see AI that don't belong there. Don't call it AI stripping unless it works, DOH!! Admin =>

 Let's not wait another 3 years for the other bugs. 

[Mr.Bad151]

The arguments are sooo old, it's not even funny anymore.

People are so set in their ways now, that it's a complete waste of time to try and move them out of their respective PvP or nutter's paradise camps.

I certainly won't waste my time trying to . . .

If you don't like the server the way it is, then you can always run your own . . .

If you can't do that, then there are lotsa of other games to play. Some are better, some are worse.

About the only concrete fact you can make is that this SQL Server kit being broken has dragged on to long.  If it's not fixed this year, then I would fear for this game's viability for the next year.  The missions are getting better but still are not where they should be. SS2 still had the best quality mission pack ever and that dyna was 2 years ago.  AI stripping is not working very well, as far as I can tell, on AoTK2.  A lot of these problems have solutions in some mission packs, but most Admins. really don't know how to use them.

Most of these issues talked about in this thread arise from techie problems with the game. It's about time they got fixed and the admins. started making full use of the techie options available without bugging out the dyna in the process (ie. No SQL Server kit that works, invisible ION Storms, double weapons fire, AI stripping that largely does not work).

Fix the game software and then no one will be in a position to argue with how it works. For starters, we'd have multiple DV shifts for PvP wins in a hex. That will get rid of this disengagement rule nonsense once and for all. There will be less players arguing and less angst and that's always good for the game.....DOH!!! 

community self-

Forgive me for making suggestions.. and offering idea to improve things..  I didn't realize the community was so set in its ways.

I will say this.. everyone so far has been looking at my suggestions as three different possibilites.. rather than 3 parts of a whole.  Individually they do have the draw back people have pointed out.. together they work.

But hey if everyone is happy, guess I'll just have to blow some people up 50 times.. whew.. I got a lot of work ahead of me..

[FPF-DieHard]

Forgive me for making suggestions.. and offering idea to improve things..  I didn't realize the community was so set in its ways.

I will say this.. everyone so far has been looking at my suggestions as three different possibilites.. rather than 3 parts of a whole.  Individually they do have the draw back people have pointed out.. together they work.

But hey if everyone is happy, guess I'll just have to blow some people up 50 times.. whew.. I got a lot of work ahead of me..

Your suggestions are all valid and make tons of sense.   it is a matter of getting them to work techically in some cases (the base missions) or trying to balance consequences versus fun.

Get on Comms and talk to me abou this stuff tonight.

[Dizzy]

Bad151, nice feedback, it's always welcome. Keep in mind there are only a handful of peeps that can make your suggestions come to fruition. DH, Tracey, Capt Jeff, Scipio, Jinn and me. Mb a cpl others. Be nice if there were more that could carry the torch. Be even nicer if all of the above mentioned peeps more freely shared inormation on how the tech issues work. Be nicer still if they were all impartial on how they setup servers and code missions.

So here's what you should know. Basically, we have 2 camps and 2 kinds of these 2 players. Hex flippers and PvPers. Both come in flavors of casual to nutter.

Also, there are 3 types of servers. Serious, Semi-serious and fun. Each cater to the above 4 player classifications. 

All of the above have their own unique perspectives and need to be experienced first hand to understand them fully. If you want to be a fair critic, and or server admin, you must have once played EACH and EVERY one of them on some past servers to know fully what you are talking about. Like karnak said, these are old arguments that have multi-faceted dynamics far beyond what most players have experienced. Such that some are so set in their ways, these issues are buried under hot embers waiting reignite... But no one wants to really stir them up... All the marshmellows and hot dogs to be roasted are long since gone.

[[KBF]MuadDib]

you can bitch...you can whine...but whose time is being wasted really?  mine!!!

hmm ca vs d6db...now that ca is just gonna run run run run until he either kills me or does something stupid and gets hurt enough...kind of like that match with scipio who decided to alt after the ai made a crippling blow...and decided to call it a ctd...come on...i am not a kid playing tag...nor am i stupid...or maybe you just think i am...

until you do not waste my time and fly your ship like youre out to kill somebody instead of running around at 31 and only turning to fire hoping to kill somebody...well im sorry...if i sd giving you the kill because i dont want to run around for an hour or more with nothing but 7ph2's and 6 drones that only go 24 and are easily out ran...or having the prey running around shooting than hiding behind ai...now with a droner that ai is gonna be dead...but that still leaves you the ability ro run around and play tag while hiding behind your ai...and the same thing is done even if you have a "live" wing...

i think maybe you need to learn some new tactics before you start crying that the rules are wrong...a kill is a kill...even if i run into a rock you wouldnt bitch if i chose that instead of sd...you still get the dv shift...and why the hell should i disengage when i have so much pp and the fact that what numbers we do have need to be managed wisely...if i have no pp left at the end of the server...oh well...at least i had fun and enjoyed myself without becoming frustrated and yelling and moaning and bitching about those who wish to waste my time...bah i already do that...dont i...sometimes to the detriment of your own ship...or maybe i just had to revise your manual so that you all are scared and run around with level 4's...or claim that you are running at 31 with a level 4, but where are your photons?

and dizzy...no fair...i dont choose to be a hex flipper...i would rather pvp all the time but most of the coailition would rather pvp...so some of us have to be grunts more than killers...

[FPF-DieHard]

I think what this post really needs are some nice hooters . . .

[Mr.Bad151]

Dib, I'm not sure if your post was directed toward me or not, at first I was surprised that you SD and didn't know why.  Once I understood, I realized that you were doing the smart thing.. but that the rules are screwy.  That is in no way an insult to you. 

[Dizzy]

It's an insult Dib. He's talking smack...

[Mr.Bad151]

STFU Dizzy!   

You're going to get me into even more trouble..  Dib probably has already scribbled my name down in his "kill at all costs" book..

[Dizzy]

I think what this post really needs are some nice hooters . . .

Hey, those look like G racks...

[GDA-S'Cipio]

...kind of like that match with scipio who decided to alt after the ai made a crippling blow...and decided to call it a ctd...come on...i am not a kid playing tag...nor am i stupid...or maybe you just think i am...

Easy up there, 'Dib.  I've still got the film if you want to see it.  It very clearly shows the bugged mission, as the AI flys off *through* several big rocks (without exploding) as it makes a straight line off the map.

-S'Cipio

[Dizzy]

I saw the film, Dib. He's lying. He's insulting u like bad151 is. It's pure smacktalk. Take em both down, dib!

[GDA-S'Cipio]

I saw the film, Dib. He's lying. He's insulting u like bad151 is. It's pure smacktalk. Take em both down, dib!

Don't you have a server you should be building?

-S'Cipio

[Dizzy]

I deny knowing anything about a server. Besides, lol, who are you kidding? Dizzy hosting a server. Are you out of your mind?

[el-Karnak]

I deny knowing anything about a server. Besides, lol, who are you kidding? Dizzy hosting a server. Are you out of your mind?

And, and, Karnak writing missions.  They prolly say do something silly like make you warp all over the map. Are you out of your mind?

BTW, Dizzy, don't forget to give SkyFlyer Positive Karma. 

[SkyFlyer]

MILF

Stupid question time for the Frog.

What is MILF?

Is it the same thing as a MBA (Married But Available). *snicker*

Wow...........

Even I know what MILF means.  Ask SkyFlyer, I bet HE even knows. 

Yes I do... And I know a few too.

Mother I'd Like (to) Fondle

And you got it right until the last word.

[[KBF]MuadDib]

I think what this post really needs are some nice hooters . . .

LMAO!

geesh not like when judge came around with his ship of lovely men did i not say ugh!

for today i dont call you anything but diehard...tomorrow tho...is another story...

[[KBF]MuadDib]

Dib, I'm not sure if your post was directed toward me or not, at first I was surprised that you SD and didn't know why.  Once I understood, I realized that you were doing the smart thing.. but that the rules are screwy.  That is in no way an insult to you. 

nah had i wanted to single you out i would have said so...

[[KBF]MuadDib]

...kind of like that match with scipio who decided to alt after the ai made a crippling blow...and decided to call it a ctd...come on...i am not a kid playing tag...nor am i stupid...or maybe you just think i am...

Easy up there, 'Dib.  I've still got the film if you want to see it.  It very clearly shows the bugged mission, as the AI flys off *through* several big rocks (without exploding) as it makes a straight line off the map.

-S'Cipio

i then apologize as my film would have shown 4 drones smacking into your #2 shield and then boom i went to desktop...no film for me 8(

too bad we didnt notice the split earlier on...sorry scipio

[[KBF]MuadDib]

I deny knowing anything about a server. Besides, lol, who are you kidding? Dizzy hosting a server. Are you out of your mind?

u get lonely out there on that rock?

[el-Karnak]

I deny knowing anything about a server. Besides, lol, who are you kidding? Dizzy hosting a server. Are you out of your mind?

u get lonely out there on that rock?

You know, after seeing 3 years of this BS, I think I am losing patience with players that don't really appreciate what they get.

You obviously don't have the tiniest clue how much work goes into making a server which is a monumental task for people with family like Dizzy. Most Admins. around here are single and have less RL responsiblities.  That's a material fact.

So, why don't you make up your mind if you really want Dizzy to run a server.  If you don't, then be brave enough to say so and clear the air. That way you will save Dizzy a lot of trouble.

If you don't want Dizzy to go to all the trouble of running a server cuz you don't like him for various reasons then I can respect that. But, you need to say it.

But, if you would like still play on his server while still hating him then that's simply wrong. Plain and simple.

At least, give him the courtesy to know so he's not be taken advantaged of when doing server.

Let me know if you have anymore questions on this issues. Bring some of your friends, if they feel the same way.

I'll be more than happy to E-X-P-L-A-I-N it to them. 

[Dizzy]

monumental

Aye.

Well said Karnak, but I think Dib was being facetious.

[FPF-DieHard]

I deny knowing anything about a server. Besides, lol, who are you kidding? Dizzy hosting a server. Are you out of your mind?

u get lonely out there on that rock?

You know, after seeing 3 years of this BS, I think I am losing patience with players that don't really appreciate what they get.

You obviously don't have the tiniest clue how much work goes into making a server which is a monumental task for people with family like Dizzy. Most Admins. around here are single and have less RL responsiblities.  That's a material fact.

So, why don't you make up your mind if you really want Dizzy to run a server.  If you don't, then be brave enough to say so and clear the air. That way you will save Dizzy a lot of trouble.

If you don't want Dizzy to go to all the trouble of running a server cuz you don't like him for various reasons then I can respect that. But, you need to say it.

But, if you would like still play on his server while still hating him then that's simply wrong. Plain and simple.

At least, give him the courtesy to know so he's not be taken advantaged of when doing server.

Let me know if you have anymore questions on this issues. Bring some of your friends, if they feel the same way.

I'll be more than happy to E-X-P-L-A-I-N it to them. 

Um, I think Dib was making a joke about the "roid incident."   You are reading WAY too much into this.

[el-Karnak]

I deny knowing anything about a server. Besides, lol, who are you kidding? Dizzy hosting a server. Are you out of your mind?

u get lonely out there on that rock?

You know, after seeing 3 years of this BS, I think I am losing patience with players that don't really appreciate what they get.

You obviously don't have the tiniest clue how much work goes into making a server which is a monumental task for people with family like Dizzy. Most Admins. around here are single and have less RL responsiblities.  That's a material fact.

So, why don't you make up your mind if you really want Dizzy to run a server.  If you don't, then be brave enough to say so and clear the air. That way you will save Dizzy a lot of trouble.

If you don't want Dizzy to go to all the trouble of running a server cuz you don't like him for various reasons then I can respect that. But, you need to say it.

But, if you would like still play on his server while still hating him then that's simply wrong. Plain and simple.

At least, give him the courtesy to know so he's not be taken advantaged of when doing server.

Let me know if you have anymore questions on this issues. Bring some of your friends, if they feel the same way.

I'll be more than happy to E-X-P-L-A-I-N it to them. 

Um, I think Dib was making a joke about the "roid incident."   You are reading WAY too much into this.

 Perhaps you're right and perhap you're not. But, I felt a general warning shot was in order before Dizzy does something that won't be appreciated by the playerbase. Sometimes, admins. are letting themselves get abused by players that think they they are in-expendable.  Better not to do anything then.  No server, no potential risk of being taken advantaged of.

With other online communities, I give such posts the benefit of the doubt of being simply smart-a$$ talk looking for a cheap laugh. However, we must be realists here, this is the only gaming community where I've seen players actively boycott dynas for petty reasons, and some RMs were included too. All because of some silly forum flame-war. They did not care if dyna quality went down, as long as they got their way. Obviously, there was a dis-connect in player knowledge of what work goes into a server.

So, I take anything that smacks of "we're doing this to get you out of the game" seriously.  That kind of behavior is not acceptable.  Any RM or Admins. that lets a player do that on their server is not doing their job.

[GDA-Kel]

Why not increase the DV shift for the hex in PvP?

Instead of getting a 1 DV shift for winning a PvP, make it 2 or 5?

That will encourage people to fight to the death, and make an hours worth of battle worthwhile.

It will also make the defeated party think twice about returning to the same hex as they have just cost there side a huge
DV shift in that hex.

Problem is for alot of the suggestions I *believe* you need a functional SQL server
or the source code.
Neither of which we have.

Features that were developed and implemented in a SQL-enabled server over 2 years ago...

1.  Variable DV shift.  Beat the AI = 1 pt shift.  Beat another player = 10 pt shift.  Gives a whole new meaning to PvP victories. 

2.  Custom shipyards.  Races only build what they want and what they can afford economically.  granted, you had to buy/sell ships using the chat system, which was clunky, bit it worked.

3.  Bases could be set to destruct when their hex DV fell below a certain level.  For example, a starbase would remain on the map until the DV fell to below 5.   

4.  Map enforced LOS.  If you capture a hex for your race that does not border a hex already under your control, ownership of the hex stays neutral, but the DV automatically goes up to max.  So, you may not capture the hex, but you deny the previous owner that hex as well. 

Unfortunately, the max player load on any of the servers that used this stuff was 16.  So, this cannot be considered a valid load test.  It was also done using EAW, after the majority had moved on to OP, so it had virtually no support from this playerbase.       

All of this was done without the benefit of the source code.  So...as Spock would say 'There are always possibilities.' 

[Dizzy]

LOL@ Karnak... well said again.

I think we have grown up a bit since then. Not too much tho. Everyone should