Topic: New Server Rules Ideas

[Hexx]

Well just having watched Ottawa slap Toronto around I'm in a good mood
came up with some new (well actually old, I just stole them) ideas to possibly be tested on a future server

- Scouts -
If a fleet includes a scout, the enemy may not disengage from the battle without the side with the scout's
permission

-pros: Takes away (maybe) some firepower from the 3 player fleets, gives scouts some actual use, might add a tiny bit
        of strategy to creating units rather than just throwing the three best together (would now be the two best and a scout)
-cons: Someone has to fly the scout

Carriers
CVA's are supposed to be protected above all, therefore
A)If a CVA flies with wingmen, one must be an escort. Therefore if a CVA flies with one wing, it would have to be an escort
Two wings could include one escort and one other legal ship. Of course if the escort crashes out, the mission can still be flown
but you would be unable to fly a mission with a CVA & 2 non-escorts

B)No two carriers can fly together unless one is a CVE.

Heavy Battlecruisers
-Heavy Battlecruisers may wing with other BCH's (max of two )
BCV's/BCS's may not

Disengagement
-The first time a player disengages with a Capital ship they are subject to normal disengagement rules
 The second time they are out 2x as long or surrender X vps
 The third time they are out  3x as long or surrender 2X vps
The above would probably be over a (roughly) 24hr period as I don;t think anyone wants to
really keep track that long, let alone longer

Dreadnoughts
DN's may only wing with non-specialty ships
unless the ship in question is a scout or escort (?)
This means no DN -Carrier/droner/Fast Cruiser/ combos

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Looks like alot of rules with very little reward for them.

Note:  While it would be cool to have scouts useful for something,  I'm not sure this is the way to go.  The best use fior them would be if a scout pilot could see icon movement and terrain features 2 hexes away, but this  isn't possible now 9at least to my knowlegde).


As for wingman requirements, drafting is too much hit and miss to make this feasible.

As for 2 BCHs winging, some race's BCHs are more than a match for other races BCVs and I think this would be unbalancing if BCHs were allowed to wing but BCVs weren't.

As for longer disengagement penalties for capital shipsafter multiple engagements. I think this would just cut down on PvP matches between larger ships...... and only encourages a move to the larger capital ships so as to not be chased out.for extended periods.  If you want to get players out of the heavy iron more, shortening the penalty for non capital ships would likely have more impact in the desired direction.  Another possible way would be to extend the penalty for the capital ships based on size.   Say  1.5x the standard penalty for BCHs 2x for DNs, 3x for Battleships. I'd also give the capital ship pilot a 0.5x discount if he was forced to disengage in a mission where he had no wingman.

[Hexx]

Thanks Chuut, I guess you're right about the BCH's
-was just a thought I had for getting a 2v2 BCH match
Still I guess if all players wanted one on a server they coul set it up themselves.

I'd disagree about the drafting being too hit or miss,there's a few players
who are still that way, but for the most part you tend to be able to draft for your wing
without huge issues.
I'm not saying it is a perfect idea, but I think it's technically feasible to set a CV(A/PFT) up with an escort
that should be drafting for them.

The scout idea is actually one suggestedby someone (Scip?) in another thread- I like the idea, actually I love the idea
but I'm not actually sure if anyone wold use it. CVA+NAC+ Scout would be cool, but it'd still get whipped by a
CVA+NAC+CCH.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

If you want to add something for scouts, perhaps you increase the disengagement penalty by 50% in a mission where a player on the winning side is flying a scout, and it survives the mission.

One reason I don't like the no disengement option you proposed would be situations where someone was flying a Dreadnaught or Battleship and drafted an opponent in a smaller ship.  Making that opponent stay and face certain destruction by the heavy iron while the scout just sat back seems to be a sure way to frustrate players, especially casual players without much prestige in the bank and newer players.

P.S.  I'd be careful about taking too many ideas from S'Cipio.  While it was not a bad idea in  the distant past when he lived near me and I could tell him what to think  , now that he lives in DC it isn't advisable.  I mean what good ever came out of Washington D.C.?  J'inn is also living in D.C., need I say more?

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

Scouts in SFB had special scout functions, they could lend EM to other ships, take over drone control etc. none of which we have in SFC. Scouts also had better sensors for tactical intelligence (which we do have in SFC to a limited automated capacity).

An idea for making Scouts useful in SFC arose awhile back, where a single Scout vessel was to be employed to 'scout' out enemy terrain. Scouts are not really combat capable, but with their advanced sensors and scanners would detect enemy ships before being detected. One possible way to emply this in game, was to make a loan scout vessel exempt to the deepstrike rule. Since a scout is not likely to win very many engagements anyway (even against AI), essentially the scouting player could only really move around the board with impunity, but mostly only by losing missions (certainly deepstriking a base or planet would be impossible). The disengagement rule should still apply, however, since once the Scout has been discovered and its warp signiture identified and tracked by the enemy, it has lost its element of secrecy.

[Dizzy]

Karnak and I tried to get a scout to give in mission ECM bonuses. Wouldnt work. We tried by class and there doesnt seem to be anything in the script to get a ship to add to its shift bonus. Mb you could take a look, tracey? My idea was to reclass all vessels scouts as carriers and designate carriers in the scripts to generate ECM bonus for their team. Karnak couldnt figure out how to do it.

[el-Karnak]

Karnak and I tried to get a scout to give in mission ECM bonuses. Wouldnt work. We tried by class and there doesnt seem to be anything in the script to get a ship to add to its shift bonus. Mb you could take a look, tracey? My idea was to reclass all vessels scouts as carriers and designate carriers in the scripts to generate ECM bonus for their team. Karnak couldnt figure out how to do it.

Actually, I don't remember trying to re-class ships in-mission.  I must have never gotten to this action item.

[Dizzy]

U didnt. I reclassed all scouts as Carriers. Then in your script u tried to get the carrier class to trigger an ECM bonus for all ships on that side if present. I think you said there wasnt any code for ecm or shift bonuses...

[el-Karnak]

U didnt. I reclassed all scouts as Carriers. Then in your script u tried to get the carrier class to trigger an ECM bonus for all ships on that side if present. I think you said there wasnt any code for ecm or shift bonuses...

OK, that's sounds more plausible. I think that I think I said that too.  I think that I think that  mSetFighter() stuff was not working either for the EEK AI stuff. I think that I think that I was trying also to ram in Hornets on Hydran ships and kept getting funny itty, bitty Killer Bees.

[Dizzy]

Yeah, that setfighter stuff was crap.

[762_XC]

Do a real disengagment rule Hexx.

1 hex radius, all over the map.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Do a real disengagment rule Hexx.

1 hex radius, all over the map.

And a map the size of the one used in Artic fire to go along with it 

[FPF-DieHard]

Do a real disengagment rule Hexx.

1 hex radius, all over the map.

And a map the size of the one used in Artic fire to go along with it 

What Chuut says, this needs to be dependent on the size of the map.

[762_XC]

Articfire's would have needed a 12 hex radius.

Does anybody really want another Sockfoot server? This is getting too boring.

[Hexx]

Articfire's would have needed a 12 hex radius.

Does anybody really want another Sockfoot server? This is getting too boring.

Err
what was Sockfoot's server?


And just a thought- (seriously, haven't thought about any downsides)
what about if you disengage in a Cap ship ou aren't only out of the hex but you have
to sell the ship?
Seems to be a good idea to me.. but I think I'm missing something..

[762_XC]

Sockfoot was somebody who wrote a long D2 term paper which basically said PvP should be avoided at all costs, because running quick missions against the AI was the only way to win a server.

It was written way back in Articfire days but unfortunately it's still true.

[ShadowLord]

One initial thought I had about new server rules --

I dont have any problem with FF class ships not being worth any pts for a PVP kill however, I believe any ship making deepstrikes should be worth a VP regardless of their size.

[FPF-DieHard]

And just a thought- (seriously, haven't thought about any downsides)
what about if you disengage in a Cap ship ou aren't only out of the hex but you have
to sell the ship?
Seems to be a good idea to me.. but I think I'm missing something..

The Storm Seaon 2 rule was perfect.   If you disengaged in a DN in an even numbered engagement, you gave up VC points (5 points, 20 if a DN was killed).   This was the last time I remember people fighting tool and nail while in DNs.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Sockfoot was somebody who wrote a long D2 term paper which basically said PvP should be avoided at all costs, because running quick missions against the AI was the only way to win a server.

It was written way back in Articfire days but unfortunately it's still true.

Actually Sockfoot was one of the most skilled and honorable pilots ever to play the game.  He advocated not fighting a battle on the enemies terms but rather adopting strategy that best suited the goal of your side.  This could be PvP or it could be hex flipping, he wrote a piece on how to hex-flip but wasn't limited by only that train of thought as some (who never knew him)  would portray him to be.   He actually believed in the concept of strategy rather than getting into the most uber PvP ship you could find and refusing to get out of it, preferring not to think but just sitting on a front line hexx with your best wing combination and waiting for someone to draft you.

He wasn't just a hex flipper like some would like to portray him as, although he could hex flip if it was called for, he was also skilled in PvP and one of the best ever at strategy and having more impact from his missions than could ever be achieved by mindless hex flipping.  So I call a sockfoot server one that makes it possible to use your brain to explore numerous strqategic options not limited by inordinate numbers of server rules restrictions (aimed at Nerfing those who know how to use such tactics) that are imposed because someone doesn't want to have to use their brain to counter their opposition and would rather sit on one hex in their awesome PvP boat to do so.

Now there are some good rules and many of these are necessary, but they should be made to achieve balance and to allow for all levels of strategy.

[Hexx]

   This was the last time I remember people fighting tool and nail while in DNs.

Miss having someone on your side?

I've fought tool lot's of times with his DN's, he refuses to fight me in an even BP match..

It worked though? I can see people taking a 5pt loss than risking a 20 pt loss,