Topic: Proposed Production point system

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

In previous servers that used production points, a race or empire was given a certain number of points to build capital ships with, sometimes based on map territory.

Instead of doing this by race, this system proposes it is done on a per player basis.

Each player begins the server with a certain number of production points for buying capital ships. This number would initially be small, and could increase as a player went up ranks. PvP kills would also earn more Production points based on some scale an your opponent's ship. Ideally it would need SQL, so that each player's Prod. pts, would be stored as a tally, and when they bought a capital ship from the web shipyard, their 'bank" would be adjusted accordingly. If there are insufficient Prod. pts. to buy a ship, then a player won't be allowed to buy it until they have earned enough points.

Players then have the choice to save points for something bigger, or spend as they like, but once the points are gone, they wont be allowed to buy any capital ships until they earn more. The advantage with this, is that no one could ever fly a ship they were not allowed to fly, and hence no arguments. It still limits capital ships thus preventing servers from escalating in heavy metal fests, and if its done with SQL, can be fully automated so no record or account keeping was required.

Thoughts, suggestions and criticisms?

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

I think it would be a good way to do away with or reduce PvP VCs making pliots hurt themselves but not their team in PvP loses, other than keeping themselves out of more effective ships.  Also even the smaller specialty ships like escorts, droners, and carriers could cost points if there were no PvP vcs attached.  For example I lose A DF+ a two point ship, doesn't hurt too much but if I lose 5 of them I start to really feel it, if I only get 25 points over the course of the server, even as a nutter, so I better go get me some PvP kills to make up for it.

different rewards in points could be automatically programmed such that rewards for pilots fighting  would be divided amongst the victors so that 1 v 1 s would reward more than 2 v 1s and such that ship hull class differential caused variations in rewards.  This would encourage battles with more equal ships.  Tracey tells me this is all possible.

Additionally the disengagement penalty for ship loss could be done away with, although the one for disengagemnet would still be necessary.  With no disengage penalty for a death a pilot might have to choose between the advantages of no disengage penalty vs keeping the points, some interesting situations there.

Vanilla ships might become a viable option for a change as well.

[Julin Eurthyr]

I've been trying to work up such a system for a while now, and if SQL could automate it then that's all the better...

My proposals have typically looked a lot like many "current" systems (1 pt. for a BCH / small specialty ship, 2 for a DN, etc.) with a maximum of 5 points or so over the life of a server. (one or more of them being earned via Rank)  Also, buying some of the "super" ships (BBV) would require both the attainment of high rank and the saving of all points throughout the server (using a line/command ship the entire time).

Some thoughts on the PvP earnings are:
1: nobody should be denied the opportunity of flying any special ship, if they meet the requisites, whether they are a PvP whore or a hex-flipper.  Therefore, the scheme should give everyone an equal opportunity to fly any ship based purely on time served and decisions made (ie, stay in said line vessels)
2: Winning your PvP matches and keeping the spiffy ship and points are reward enough, blowing the enemy's spiffy ships up will reduce the amount of heavy iron on the board, which will only further help your team.  Extra rewards (such as the earning of more specialty ship points) may go OTT in favor of the PvP masters (imagine DH having enough points to stay in a DNH for 2 weeks of the server... )

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Actually with a ship hull class diferential factored in as I mentioned in my previous post, , a DN blowing up light cruisers wouldn't net you many points, the reverse however would get you quite a reward.  So staying in a DN wouldn't make you alot of points unless other DNs were flying around 

Also I talked to Tracy about the possibility of linking bonus points to mission and achievement medals.  This bonus would be good for only the first time when the medal was awarded.  So you get a bonus for your first PvP kill that gets you a medal, but no further bonus after that.  She said it might be more tricky but likely doable.  This would reward people for getting involved in some PvP but not give too much to the aces.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

As for the points Julin, you could go with high point totals so people would be less afraid to mix it up but, have a system where some of the smaller capital and specialty ships didn't cost much but the high end stuff cost quite a bit.  Would allow for more command cruisers but less BCHs and DNs.  Also there should be an inflation factor so that ships that are "out of date" are cheaper to buy and worth less to trade in, which would also encourage players to use their points now but still allow the option of saving if they wanted.  Imagine deciding whether to buy a CCY now and having enough points to replace a loss, or saving for the CCZ which would drain your bank due to the inflation factor.

[Hexx]

I like the idea -think my only criticism would be the "requires SQL" part
since we don't seem to have much luck.. hmm

Anyways my other concern is the same as always, there's often alot of talk about line ships
but if  (and only if) the idea is to include such things as the command variants (CC'sCWL's) then it might be an issue as the line ships tend o not be balanced as well as the CC's.
If we're counting CC's as vanilla ships (as the CCH is) then I think it's a great idea.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

I think command ships should be counted as point ships, but perhaps with a much lower factor than a droner, escort or carrier. Perhaps less inflation on the CC classes as well.  They would be affordable and easily replaceable to an extent (if you didn't spend alot of cash on DNs and BCHs) but losing 10 CBs should pretty much bankrupt you, and then some.

[Lepton]

We already have this.  It's called Prestige Points.  Raise the price of ships and you are there.  Let's not reinvent the wheel here.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

We already have this.  It's called Prestige Points.  Raise the price of ships and you are there.  Let's not reinvent the wheel here.

A PP system doesn't encourage equal number or equal ship class fights, places more emphasis on hex flipping to PvP than the suggested system, places no limits on capital ships availble to a player, etc.  Its a very different concept.

[GDA-Agave]

We already have this.  It's called Prestige Points.  Raise the price of ships and you are there.  Let's not reinvent the wheel here.

Sorry Tracey & Chuut, I've got to agree with Lepton here.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

We already have this.  It's called Prestige Points.  Raise the price of ships and you are there.  Let's not reinvent the wheel here.

Sorry Tracey & Chuut, I've got to agree with Lepton here.

Thats okay you live within pain stick striking range from here, I'll beat some sense into you later 

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Here is something to consider, a casual player might have enough starting points to buy a BCH, and if they earned a few PvP kills without dying and/or got one or two of the early promotions they might actually be able to get into a DN, if they wanted to.

Also with limited numbers  of points for big ships, PvP VCs could be downplayed so that non aces would be able to mix it up on the PvP front more without fear of costing huge VCs for their side. 

Also each big ship kill means even more in the strategic sense because they are not so easily replaced by nutter pilots.  The nutter pilots might have some more points due to making fleet admiral, but not nearly so many as to be able to buy DN after DN (Fluf style). 

Finally, would make deepstriking in a point ship a potentially expensive proposition.  I like the added risk, makes it more exciting.

[FPF-DieHard]

OOB is a collasal pain in the ass.   it either has to be 100% automated or sitck with the "points at a time" system we're using on SGO5.

All systems like htis should be team based. 

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Of course it would have to be totally automated.

As for the team oriented, there is no reason that the Maximum Heavy medal online at once approach couldn't be used in conjunction with it.

[FA Frey XC]

Here is something to consider, a casual player might have enough starting points to buy a BCH, and if they earned a few PvP kills without dying and/or got one or two of the early promotions they might actually be able to get into a DN, if they wanted to.

"if they earned a few PvP KILLS"

With the current player numbers as well as the disengagement rules this will never happen.

[Lepton]

We already have this.  It's called Prestige Points.  Raise the price of ships and you are there.  Let's not reinvent the wheel here.

A PP system doesn't encourage equal number or equal ship class fights, places more emphasis on hex flipping to PvP than the suggested system, places no limits on capital ships availble to a player, etc.  Its a very different concept.

How so?  I see no OOB in the proposal.  Just points to buy ships.  Doesn't prevent everyone from flying a BB if they can earn it.  In the proposed system, you'd have to either limit the number of points strictly or the manner in which they are earned to restrict earning many points to get something like an OOB.

This could be much more easily accomplished in a player points system by either lowering pp rewards for missions or upping ship prices.  Perhaps also the PvP mission pp bonus could be altered in some manner to keep hex-flippers from having a huge cash cow.

Further if you really want to restrict capital ships, increase the cost of losing a ship.  I don't know what value controls this in the D2 but I know it can be altered.  Lose a ship, only get 50% back in value ship for one lost or even less.  Thus the PvPers who seem to be jousting on SGO5 now in their capital ships now would either have to be a great deal more careful with those ships or find themselves back in a CL or a CA.

This kind of system really sucks for the casual players as their ship options will be restricted as if they lose a capital ship they will be unlikely to replace it, or may never afford it in the first place.  Easiest way to combat that is to give a fat initial starting pp.

[Lepton]

Couldn't we also dial back the empire economies a bit?  I think ship production in the yards is tied to empire econ, right?  Fewer capital ships in the yard if the empire doesn't have the econ to produce them in droves.

[FPF-DieHard]

Couldn't we also dial back the empire economies a bit?  I think ship production in the yards is tied to empire econ, right?  Fewer capital ships in the yard if the empire doesn't have the econ to produce them in droves.

Dude, the shipyards are complete voodoo and guesswork.   better to have too mauch than not enough.

PS.   Leptop does not deserver a -8 Karma.   Give him some love people

[Lepton]

Oh, I couldn't care less about my karma.  It's a hold-over from Hot and Spicy before it was hot and spicy.  Dizzy has been raising my karma for some time, I think.  Hell, I used to log on daily at the beginning of the karma system just to add negative karma points to people whom I had consistent real-world political disagreements in that forum.  No biggy.  It's my karma, as it were.  HEHE!!

[GDA-Agave]

PS.   Leptop does not deserver a -8 Karma.   Give him some love people

Love given!!

(Ya know Lepton, I don't know if I would want Diehard pimping love for me considering the sig pic he is currently sporting.)



I'm not sure any of us need THAT KIND of love.

(DH, that sig pic is sick on so many levels,    I think that is why I find it so damn funny.     )