Topic: Yet another server rule idea  (Read 10878 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC

  • Empress of the Empire
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2543
  • Gender: Female
Yet another server rule idea
« on: October 31, 2005, 06:23:30 pm »
Thus far to date, nearly all of the PvP VCs awarded have revolved around the hull classes of the ships flown, with the exception of bounties (although these have played only a small role).

How about instead of using the hull class of the ship being flown, we use a pilot rating. As a server progresses, each pilot will score individual PvP points for victory in battle which accumulate and are used to determine the VCs awarded for the battle. Each pilot begins with 1 pt. The outcome of the battle serves as a modifier to points awarded ie. destroyed = 100%, captured = 200%, forced disengage = 25%, internal damage = 10% (SFB S2.0 Victory Conditions)

Example: Tool wins a PvP match. Since it is the first match of the server, both he and his opponent have 1 PvP point each. He destroys his opponent so he gains 100% of his opponents PvP points. Tool is now worth 2 PvP points, his opponent remains on 1 (since this is the minimum). 1 PvP point is also awarded to his team.

Next battle, WarSears kills Tool. Since Tool was worth 2 PvP points, WarSears earns these points, and is now worth 3 PvP points. Tool's worth drops back to 1 PvP point, and War Sears' team gains 2 PvP points.

The following battle, WarSears destroys another opponent worth 1 PvP point. War Sears is now worth 4 PvP points. Then finally in the next battle, Wae Sears is hunted down by several enemy pilots and forced to disengage. Since he was worth 4 PvP points, 25% of his point tally is awarded to the other side = 1 PvP point and is distributed evenly among the victors. War Sears is now worth 4 - 1 = 3 PvP points.

And so on.

Advantages: Such a system can be used to create a PvP ladder which can be updated as the server progresses (which would be interesting). Players (especially new players) who are not strong in PvP will not disadvantage their side as much. When 2 or 3 'aces' that have high PvP points finally meet in battle, it becomes a bit like a grand final in a baseball series.

Disadvantages: Requires extra book keeping (but can be automated with some work). It sounds complicated.

I submit, however, that added complexity is not sufficient reason alone not to use a new rule or system, unless it is so complex as to be beyond the understanding of the majority of players. In this case, only the RM's really need to know how the system works, all the player needs to know is to report the kill and the RMs and admins will do the calculation (which in my opinion is really only very basic arithmetic, its not like you have to calculate a second order linear differential calculus equation).

Comments, suggestions and criticisms?
Captain FPF-TraceyG, Federation Protection Fleet


SFC2.net Admin member
SFC3.net Admin member
Voting member of the DGA
Member of XenoCorp, Squadron Commodore

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #1 on: October 31, 2005, 08:08:55 pm »
I propsed somehitng like this for Mirror (or maybe I stole it from you ..)
I like it, but many people were of the opinion (again) that it hurt the new and less skilled PVP
pilots and should be avoided.

Still I'd be all for it if you can sell it..
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Dfly

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1735
  • Lyran Alliance Lives
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #2 on: October 31, 2005, 09:50:17 pm »
I too like it Tracey, but there would be one snag that I can see.  The timeline of battle.  Which battle happened when would and can change all the values of said players.  Let's say someone who was in battle does not report immediately, but only after a couple more PvP battles, before he logs off.  Those battles will have taken place in a different order from which they were fought.

Perhaps with SQL running and keeping actual battle accounts and time accounts(if possible), this would be no biggie.  Waiting for each battle to be PROPERLY(ie: stardate, ships, pilots, results, and mission time) reported, then going back a day or 2 to put them in the proper order, then calculating the Player points at the actual time of battle may be a bigger headache than most RMs want.

I stongly emphasize that all players should(must) have pen and paper on desktop and keep notes of all PvP that he/she is involved in, the stardate, the ships and pilots, and the total time of mission, reguardless of which server they are flying in. 

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #3 on: November 01, 2005, 03:40:30 am »
I don't care for the idea.

You have to consider a pilot who likes to change up the ships they fly.  Imagine a player who racks up a couple of kills in a Command Cruiser in early, then decides he wants to take a light cruiser out for a spin and gets killed by a DN.  Is that light cruiser worth that much in VCs?  The system propossed would deter pilots from flying whatever ships they wanted after a couple of PvP wins because they wouldn't want to risk the extra points in anything less than the best PvP ships available.  Also you need consider multiple accounts.  Pilot A might be good in a romulan ship earning a couple kills, but maybe he sucks at Lyran.  If he has two accounts does killing the Lyran one earn the other side the PvP points he earned as a Romulan?  If so wouldn't this keep him from experimenting and trying to have fun while learning Lyran?

Offline C-Los

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 436
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #4 on: November 01, 2005, 06:24:51 am »
Calculator City....  :o

I'm with Chuut on this one....too much figuring and not enough fun   ;)
C-Los, Commanding Officer U.S.S. Scorpion




"Life is short, have fun and enjoy !"

Offline KHH_Mrogue

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 93
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #5 on: November 01, 2005, 09:03:51 am »
Isn't this what bounties are for?  Bounties could be for pilots and ships.  On every server I've been on, pilots have laid traps for both pilots and ships.  Can we change the bounty system?

Offline Father Ted

  • Starfleet Chaplain-Recalled to Active Duty
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1356
  • Next to Ted Williams in the freezer
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #6 on: November 01, 2005, 09:14:40 am »
Gotta go with Chuut and Carlos. This is an accounting nightmare waiting to happen. It also doesn't take into account the newb factor. Say Hexx kill eight newbies, then gets wasted by Kreug. That's 8 points thrown away!  ;D

Captain: USS Majestik Moose NCC-1712


"Live as brave men; and if fortune is adverse, front its blows with brave hearts." -Cicero
"Superman wears Jack Bauer jammies."-Anonymous
"Better to fight for something than live for nothing." -George S. Patton

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #7 on: November 01, 2005, 09:45:30 am »
"wasted by Kreug"

I know it's an example, but let's be realistic here  ;D
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Father Ted

  • Starfleet Chaplain-Recalled to Active Duty
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1356
  • Next to Ted Williams in the freezer
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #8 on: November 01, 2005, 10:03:55 am »
"wasted by Kreug"

I know it's an example, but let's be realistic here  ;D

Excuse me for improper use of the English language. How 'bout this: "..then Kreug puts a cap in his ***!" ;)

Captain: USS Majestik Moose NCC-1712


"Live as brave men; and if fortune is adverse, front its blows with brave hearts." -Cicero
"Superman wears Jack Bauer jammies."-Anonymous
"Better to fight for something than live for nothing." -George S. Patton

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #9 on: November 01, 2005, 10:13:38 am »
"wasted by Kreug"

I know it's an example, but let's be realistic here  ;D

Excuse me for improper use of the English language. How 'bout this: "..then Kreug puts a cap in his ***!" ;)

It's the respect that I play for..  :P
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Father Ted

  • Starfleet Chaplain-Recalled to Active Duty
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1356
  • Next to Ted Williams in the freezer
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #10 on: November 01, 2005, 10:26:39 am »
Plus 1 for having a good sense of humor! ;)

Captain: USS Majestik Moose NCC-1712


"Live as brave men; and if fortune is adverse, front its blows with brave hearts." -Cicero
"Superman wears Jack Bauer jammies."-Anonymous
"Better to fight for something than live for nothing." -George S. Patton

Offline Riskyllama

  • D.Net Beta Tester
  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 748
  • Gender: Male
  • Risky
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #11 on: November 01, 2005, 03:55:35 pm »
my thoughts are a litte late, but...
Advantages: Such a system can be used to create a PvP ladder which can be updated as the server progresses (which would be interesting). Players (especially new players) who are not strong in PvP will not disadvantage their side as much. When 2 or 3 'aces' that have high PvP points finally meet in battle, it becomes a bit like a grand final in a baseball series.

Disadvantages: Requires extra book keeping (but can be automated with some work). It sounds complicated.

Comments, suggestions and criticisms?

This sounds a LOT like the CUGS ladder system...heck it migh even be a way to get some of their pilots over here.

You have to consider a pilot who likes to change up the ships they fly. Imagine a player who racks up a couple of kills in a Command Cruiser in early, then decides he wants to take a light cruiser out for a spin and gets killed by a DN.
true, but it'll make pilots who do begin to excel more valuable targets, no matter what they fly(just as the bounty system does now). They'll have to decide if they need their dinky little DF+ or if they should stick to a NCC, plus if each account IS seperate, that eliminates that other worry of yours.
I too like it Tracey, but there would be one snag that I can see. The timeline of battle.....
Perhaps with SQL running and keeping actual battle accounts and time accounts(if possible), this would be no biggie. Waiting for each battle to be PROPERLY(ie: stardate, ships, pilots, results, and mission time) reported, then going back a day or 2 to put them in the proper order, then calculating the Player points at the actual time of battle may be a bigger headache than most RMs want...
DFly has a good point here...Tracey, Bonk, and the other great minds, are you guys closer to geting the kinks out of SQL?
Everything is sweetened by risk. ~Alexander Smith

Offline FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC

  • Empress of the Empire
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2543
  • Gender: Female
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #12 on: November 01, 2005, 04:39:41 pm »
Thankyou for the feedback, all good points.

It was suggested that this would not work because of newbies, however, this system was designed so that ace pilots and newbies could fly together on a server with PvP VCs. Suppose in the example given that Hexx did kill 8 newbies and was worth 8 PvP VC points. If we assume that Hexx is not a newbie and has reasonable piloting skill (especially if he just had 8 victories in a row), then this measure of his PvP worth may very well be quite realistic. Under such a system, you may find that the really good pilots have 20 or 30 PvP points, so 8 may not be all that much.

Yes, it is an accounting nightmare, and ideally an automated system using SQL would be perfect for it. However, even without SQL, the only people that really need to know the system are the RMs and admins. Players really don't need to do anything at all, other than report the kills (however, accurate reporting would be essential, but this is no different to previous servers anyway).

The criticism about this being like the Bounty system, yes, in fact, this would replace the Bounty system. It can even be thought of as a self regulating bounty system.

In regard to the criticism about an 'ace' wanting to try out different ships and flying a race or ship that they do not excel in, and thus losing their PvP points, yes, this is a valid criticsm. It then needs to be weighed up then, which is better, the system that accomodates for new green pilots in a PvP rich environment or the current system based on hull class only, which adversely effects green pilots. The current bounty system, however, draws the same criticism. For example, on SG5, DieHard has a bounty placed on him. If he wished to fly a Gorn Light Cruiser and was caught on the front and killed, then the enemy would still get the bounty. Those pilots worth high PvP VCs then, would need to choose carefully which ship and where they would fly. Logically, if you are intending to seek out PvP on the front lline, then regardless of whether such a system was in place or not, a player will still prefer to take the best PvP ship available according to his or her own flying style. The argument, then, that this system would dissuade players from trying out different ships is partially supported, but this is no different to our campaign setups currently being employed. Any player can still chose to try out different ships away from the front line of course. This also presents a strategic decision that a player will be faced with. Do they take the PvP ship in case they get caught on the front line, or do they take that hex flipper and risk being killed. For such a criticsm to be substantiated firmly, the system would actually need to be tested on a real server to know for sure if in fact this would be the outcome.

I am not familiar with CUGS ladder play, but this system could be represented as a ladder of pilots based on who had the highest number of PvP points, and would reflect not just total kills, but overall skill as well. In the above example, supposing Hexx killed 8 newbies and was worth 8 PvP VCs and was compared to another player who had only one kill, numbers alone would make Hexx look like a PvP god. However, if the latter player's one kill hapenned to be WarSears and the battle was a very hard fought one between aces, and WarSears was worth 15 PvP VCs at the time, then this system better reflects the skill of a pilot, in addition to kills made. The overall worth of a pilot to each side then, whether it be through sheer number of kills, or hard fought battles, or both, is then characterised by their PvP VC worth.
Captain FPF-TraceyG, Federation Protection Fleet


SFC2.net Admin member
SFC3.net Admin member
Voting member of the DGA
Member of XenoCorp, Squadron Commodore

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #13 on: November 01, 2005, 10:12:12 pm »
Do they take the PvP ship in case they get caught on the front line, or do they take that hex flipper and risk being killed. For such a criticsm to be substantiated firmly, the system would actually need to be tested on a real server to know for sure if in fact this would be the outcome.


Speaking from personal experience, I knew on AOTK I that I had a bounty on me and thus postponed my venture into learning how to fly Lyran as I didn't want to be caught in a ship I wasn't familiar with.  This was a big part of the reason I flew Lyran on Storm Season II as the situation on AOTK I prevented me from trying out Lyran earlier as I had hoped to do, it being a rare occassion at that time that the Lyrans and Kzin were allied on a server.

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #14 on: November 02, 2005, 03:46:47 pm »
How is taking a flipper risking you getting killed?   All it risks is you getting beaten.
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


el-Karnak

  • Guest
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #15 on: November 02, 2005, 04:48:59 pm »
Do they take the PvP ship in case they get caught on the front line, or do they take that hex flipper and risk being killed. For such a criticsm to be substantiated firmly, the system would actually need to be tested on a real server to know for sure if in fact this would be the outcome.


Speaking from personal experience, I knew on AOTK I that I had a bounty on me and thus postponed my venture into learning how to fly Lyran as I didn't want to be caught in a ship I wasn't familiar with.  This was a big part of the reason I flew Lyran on Storm Season II as the situation on AOTK I prevented me from trying out Lyran earlier as I had hoped to do, it being a rare occassion at that time that the Lyrans and Kzin were allied on a server.

I would have the Admin. say that you cannot put a bounty on any player that has not reached Captain's rank in lifetime prestige. Usually that is set at 25K.  Maybe, Commodore rank, that's 50K.  That will give the player ample time to dabble in unfamiliar races.

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #16 on: November 03, 2005, 01:02:15 am »
How is taking a flipper risking you getting killed?   All it risks is you getting beaten.

2 words Deep Strikes

Offline Riskyllama

  • D.Net Beta Tester
  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 748
  • Gender: Male
  • Risky
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #17 on: November 03, 2005, 01:42:08 am »
then again, what real risk is that to you or any other drone boater?, seeing as you can pay for a DF+ in about 3 missions and on the last two servers, they counted for no points?

alls killing you does is slow you down for 5...maybe 10 minutes getting another ship and keep you out of one hex for half an hour
Everything is sweetened by risk. ~Alexander Smith

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #18 on: November 03, 2005, 09:42:02 am »
then again, what real risk is that to you or any other drone boater?, seeing as you can pay for a DF+ in about 3 missions and on the last two servers, they counted for no points?

alls killing you does is slow you down for 5...maybe 10 minutes getting another ship and keep you out of one hex for half an hour

The same pretty much applies for a Command Cruiser to all but the most casual player after the first day or so.  Think of how many Command Cruisers most players can afford by servers end.

I'm not saying that a server setup with VCs on a DF would necessarily be wrong, just that the VC should match the ship not the pilot.  Otherwise I'll simply  forego PvP altogether to play the strategic type of game I prefer in order to keep more options open.  It would be a shame, because I do really enjoy PvP, but it is a secondary thing with me as I prefer to play strategically first and tactically as the situation arises.  If I make 5 kills in a PvP ship, then lose all advantage gained for my team by doing so by getting killed deepstriking in a DF seems to me that there is no longer a reason to try to PvP for points.

I've pretty much flown with everyone at one time or another so most of you know sometimes I like to hexflip, and other times I'll basically be hunting for the enemy pilots, it depends on my mood and the situation.  When my options disappear my enjoyment level goes down as does the time I invest in playing.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2005, 09:56:15 am by KAT Chuut-Ritt »

Offline Mog

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 610
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #19 on: November 03, 2005, 10:54:49 am »
What's with the obsession with adding even more frkkn rules? Aren't there too many as it is?
Merriment is All

Fear the Meow!

Offline KBF-Kurok

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 829
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #20 on: November 03, 2005, 11:21:38 am »
What's with the obsession with adding even more frkkn rules? Aren't there too many as it is?
agreed

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #21 on: November 03, 2005, 12:14:02 pm »
Agreed
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


el-Karnak

  • Guest
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #22 on: November 03, 2005, 03:55:17 pm »
How many people actually bother to read paragraphs of rules anyway.  I certainly do not, unless I get stuck with RM/ARM duty.  Frankly, speaking when you are playing games you don't have much inclination to spend L-E-I-S-U-R-E time reading a book of rules.  I just log on and wait for an RM guy to tell me what the rules are, so TS is always full on rules discussions.  If the dyna has too many rules to bear like some god awful OOB thing then I don't bother playing.  This is why I always a big fan of embedding rules in the server kit or missions scripts, as a last resort. No one can argue with the game software. ;D
« Last Edit: November 03, 2005, 04:16:17 pm by el-Karnak »

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #23 on: November 03, 2005, 04:15:11 pm »
I dont see how we could have a popular server with much fewer rules than SGO5 and have it not spiral out of control one way or the other.

Offline Mog

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 610
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #24 on: November 03, 2005, 04:27:32 pm »
Rule 1: Don't cheat.
Rule 2: Don't be a jerk
Rule 3: Don't exploit.
Rule 4: Have fun.

What more do you need?
Merriment is All

Fear the Meow!

Offline Riskyllama

  • D.Net Beta Tester
  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 748
  • Gender: Male
  • Risky
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #25 on: November 03, 2005, 04:44:03 pm »
Rule 1: Don't cheat.
Rule 2: Don't be a jerk
Rule 3: Don't exploit.
Rule 4: Have fun.

What more do you need?
5. Make the new guys feel welcome.
6. Drag some vets back into the game, speaking of which: Mog have I seen you on a recent Dyna?
Everything is sweetened by risk. ~Alexander Smith

762_XC

  • Guest
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #26 on: November 03, 2005, 05:02:21 pm »
#3 is apparently still up for debate.

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #27 on: November 03, 2005, 05:07:12 pm »
Rule 1: Don't cheat.
Rule 2: Don't be a jerk
Rule 3: Don't exploit.
Rule 4: Have fun.

What more do you need?

On,etwo and three are fine
Four is very subjective

Player A,b,c don't cheat, aren't jerks, doesn't exploit
like to fly on the same side,and have 24/7 to play and like to use units of 3 mirak BB's each

Players D & E don't cheat,aren't jerks, don't expilot
like to fly on the same side and have may 2 hours a night to play
They also like to run solo Romulan ships

Server will be over while players D&E are at work
Even if they manage to catch the guys in PVP they'll die.

I think the rules balance that has been achieved on J'inns,DH's & Dizzy's servers are a
relatively fair bunch. I'd alos say we can't really cut that many out and still maintain
and sense of balance.
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #28 on: November 03, 2005, 05:28:31 pm »
Rule 1: Don't cheat.
Rule 2: Don't be a jerk
Rule 3: Don't exploit.
Rule 4: Have fun.

What more do you need?


wHEN'S THE LAST TIME YOU PLAYED ON A SERVER? wHAT DO U KNOW? oops caps.

We can fly F14A's on just anything. We cant have 3x players fleeting around all in carriers or flying all DF's. We cant NOT have the disengage penalty. STOP posting BS. This pisses me off because it confuses those players who ARE NOT familiar with past D2 servers and know nothing about the why's and how's the rules were reached to this date and will just think why have them at all and its all just useless complicated crap they dont need to familiarize themselves with. This attitude hurts the community. IF you want to go do away with rules, go here: http://www.dynaverse.net/forum/index.php/topic,163360759.msg1122631401.html#msg1122631401 and eliminate each and every rule u think u can and explain why. I know a few that can go, but oh simple 4 rule, man, enlighten us.

el-Karnak

  • Guest
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #29 on: November 03, 2005, 05:45:05 pm »
Rule 7. Don't expect server rule posts to be taken seriously if the poster does not play on dynas. ;D

:P :P

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #30 on: November 03, 2005, 05:50:59 pm »
I think Mog's points are that he would fly more if there were less rules.

That being said I do (as posted above) agree that we've got to have some,and I
think the ones we've got would be difficult to improve upon.
I haven't flown on a 3bb server, but I have flown on servers when I was starting out
where anyone who could put the time in had multi ship fleets, be they 3xDWD's or CVA
/escort combo.
Really was anything but fun as a new player.
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #31 on: November 03, 2005, 05:54:08 pm »
#3 is apparently still up for debate.




Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #32 on: November 03, 2005, 05:56:00 pm »
In my opinion the Storm Season I rules set was almost perfect all it needed was a "slot" reserved for the smaller ships, Storm Season II wasn't bad either but its time to allow some fleeting for a few servers.

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #33 on: November 03, 2005, 05:58:00 pm »
In my opinion the Storm Season I rules set was almost perfect all it needed was a "slot" reserved for the smaller ships, Storm Season II wasn't bad either but its time to allow some fleeting for a few servers.

Didn't Dizzy have some fleeting rules on SGO5?
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #34 on: November 03, 2005, 06:02:07 pm »
In my opinion the Storm Season I rules set was almost perfect all it needed was a "slot" reserved for the smaller ships, Storm Season II wasn't bad either but its time to allow some fleeting for a few servers.

Didn't Dizzy have some fleeting rules on SGO5?

He had a few minor situations where fleeting was allowed.  Strorm Season I only placed some minor restrictions on Fleeting, I recall these: Commodore rank and above, no fleets of multiple drone boats, and command vessel present; there might have been a few more but not many.   

Personally I generally prefer to fly only 1 ship, but I prefer the freedom of choice even more as not everyone will share my preference.  Thus some servers should allow more extensive fleeting IMHO.

762_XC

  • Guest
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #35 on: November 03, 2005, 06:24:55 pm »
Fleets suck. Do you really want to force MORE ppl into DN's? No you don't.

How many classic PvP battles have we had where someone was controlling more than one ship? Can you even envision such a thing?

Someone's ability to deal with a horrible fleet interface should not be what decides battles.

Someone who happens to be flying a race which is easier to control (or just has better AI) should not be what decides battles.

Someone who flies his ship skillfully, capitalizes on his strengths while minimizing those of his opponent, should be what decides battles.

Please, no fleeting crap, ever again.

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #36 on: November 03, 2005, 06:32:16 pm »
I think that's basically it. If you move some players into fleets everyone has to upgrade
Huge advantages for those fleets with droners, plasma fighters/pfs/ / big crunch weapons.

Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #37 on: November 03, 2005, 06:51:58 pm »
You could always have a "slot" for fleets.

I do remember some very cool battles where fleets were involved.  Fighting Pharoahs DN and Corbo's CCY with my fleet on SS I, winging with Agave's pf flotilla vs Blades 3 ship fleet led by a CVA with caveat IIIs, etc.

Some very fun times there. 

el-Karnak

  • Guest
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #38 on: November 03, 2005, 07:03:12 pm »
Fleets suck. Do you really want to force MORE ppl into DN's? No you don't.

How many classic PvP battles have we had where someone was controlling more than one ship? Can you even envision such a thing?

Someone's ability to deal with a horrible fleet interface should not be what decides battles.

Someone who happens to be flying a race which is easier to control (or just has better AI) should not be what decides battles.

Someone who flies his ship skillfully, capitalizes on his strengths while minimizing those of his opponent, should be what decides battles.

Please, no fleeting crap, ever again.

AI stripping missions uber alles. ;D

Fleeting is better left to strictly PvE missions, so that PvP play is not affected.  Players that like fleeting can play EEK missions that set it up for them in-mission for only combat against the AI.


Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #39 on: November 03, 2005, 07:07:23 pm »
I think that's basically it. If you move some players into fleets everyone has to upgrade
Huge advantages for those fleets with droners, plasma fighters/pfs/ / big crunch weapons.



with the addition of drone fighters to the Lyrans every race has one of these

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #40 on: November 03, 2005, 07:11:43 pm »
Do you really want to force MORE ppl into DN's? No you don't.

LMAO, fleets have the opposite effect unless a DN pilot is clueless.  The thing a fleet does best is to kill a DN.

762_XC

  • Guest
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #41 on: November 03, 2005, 07:38:34 pm »
Depends on what race. :P

Ugh, I feel sick even talking about it. I'd sooner go play SFC3 than deal with that garbage.

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #42 on: November 04, 2005, 12:24:03 am »
Well there are some players who do like the option of fleets in some form, seems to me almost criminal to deny then an occasional "Fleeting Server" even for a "fleeting moment", and even though I personally prefer one ship myself, I think it very selfish to demand all servers be fleetless.

I hope someone does put up a fleet friendly server for those players sometime, I'm sure anyone who objects too much can tolerate a few weeks of SFC III while it is going on.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2005, 12:37:48 am by KAT Chuut-Ritt »

Offline Mog

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 610
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #43 on: November 04, 2005, 02:28:27 am »
OMG!! DIZZY USED THE DREADED "OOPS CAPS" ON ME!!!  ;D

What I typed pisses you off? Dude, you were born pissed off, you master of melodrama.

Hexx, you got me on 4. I was going to put play with honour, or sportsmanlike, but then I figured that was covered by the first 3.

Rule 3 covers your cheese fleet scenario, imo.

Karnak, I find your rule 7 deliciously ironic. To see that coming from the biggest chucker of dolls out of the pram is highly amusing. How many times have you left the game since AOTK? I, frankly, don't care if you think my opinion is worthless; yours is of similar value to me.

Risky, taking me to task for not being on recent servers? Fyi, last one I was on was AOTK2, very briefly. Before that, I was on the GW series, which is where I retired.

Reasons for retiring (in no particular order):

Been playing SFC online since August 2000. Things can become stale after that length of time.

I'm still waiting for the Klingon Civil War server to appear - I was much looking forward to that when it was announced some 20 months or so ago. A person can get tired of waiting (Yes, I know the answer to this one, do it myself. Done server admin role before, I'm not taking the sh*t that gets thrown at them, again).

Had enough of racial bias.

Had enough of the "us v them" attitude (alliance v coalition), which came to a head in the last GW server.

Had enough of all the rules lawyering that has become more prevalent in last couple of years.

Had enough of trying to remember all the frkkn rules for servers.

Don't particularly care for the OP+ shiplist, with all that extra melted cheese.

Had enough of the "win at all costs" attitude which pervaded the game.

Question: seeing as I'm no longer actively playing, am I wasting my time checking on this forum (which I use to keep in touch with my friends, and to see if there's any server that appeals to me) and occasionally giving my opinion, as some obviously seem to think?
« Last Edit: November 04, 2005, 03:30:53 am by Mog »
Merriment is All

Fear the Meow!

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #44 on: November 04, 2005, 03:02:56 am »
No one doubts your qualifications to post an opinion, Mog, its just that you dont know wtf u are talking about. ;)

Offline FPF-Wanderer

  • Order of Battle Wonk
  • Hot and Spicy
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 354
  • Gender: Male
  • Trek Nerd Since 1976
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #45 on: November 04, 2005, 04:06:14 am »
Considering Mog's longtime standing in this community and his being a veteran from the earliest days of SFC, to see him treated as shabbily as he has been in this thread appalls me.  Dizzy, Karnak, I believe you both owe him an apology.  Your putdowns are childish and I would expect better from grown men.  Just because he hasn't played in a while doesn't mean that his opinion is any less valid.  He's trying to make a point.  You can agree to disagree with him and leave it at that.

Having said that, I can say that I disagree with my old friend about his disdain for the current ruleset, although I can understand it. Unfortunately, the 'good old days' of being able to just log in to a Dyna and play are long gone, and with it a sizable chunk of our playerbase.  I can name player after player that left this game because the ruleset became larger and larger as time went by, and with it their fun factor.

We talk and talk about having different kinds of campaigns with different rules (or less rules), and yet it never happens.  It's pretty much the same thing time after time now.  At the end of the day, I believe THAT is the point that Mog was trying to make.

And, to answer your question, Mog, no, you are not wasting your time coming here.  Even if you are 'retired', you are still a valued member of this community and always will be, as well as being my friend.  Btw, could you Pm me and explain what 'the biggest chucker of dolls out of the pram' means?  ;D
Alliance SAC, SG4 / Alliance SAC, RDSL / Federation A/RM: AOTK, SSII, GW4 / Federation Chief of Staff / Member of the Flying Circus / Alliance Map Guy

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #46 on: November 04, 2005, 05:03:31 am »
 :goodpost:

Agreed Wanderer.  Sometimes the vocal minority needs to shut up and listen to the usually silent majority when one of its memebers has something to say.  Funny they talk about being nice to newbies in one thread in an effort to attract people, then act rudely to a vet in such a way no one could blame them for leaving.

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #47 on: November 04, 2005, 08:24:00 am »
He's trying to make a point.  You can agree to disagree with him and leave it at that.

His point to attenuate the rules to his degree of simplicity is insulting to everyone who contributed to getting them to where they are today. His comments are inflammatory to the EXTREME. His ideas for a return to the 'glory' days of servers with no rules is ridiculous and I'm dissapointed anyone is wasting time on considering anything he has to say... but his comments need to be delt with never the less.

Quote
Unfortunately, the 'good old days' of being able to just log in to a Dyna and play are long gone, and with it a sizable chunk of our playerbase.  I can name player after player that left this game because the ruleset became larger and larger as time went by, and with it their fun factor.

Well, the reverse is true to. We lost a lot of players because of fleets of DF's and no rules to govern them and other similar things. If that means we lost the cheese players, then fine by me. Never liked em anyway. Good riddens. Funny how you paint only one side of the fence. You are as bad as mog in that respect.

AFA the 'good old days' is concerned, bah. Tell me what was good about em compared to current servers. More like the bad old days to me... Wanderer, why dont you host a 'Retro' server and see how many play it?

Quote
We talk and talk about having different kinds of campaigns with different rules (or less rules), and yet it never happens.  It's pretty much the same thing time after time now.  At the end of the day, I believe THAT is the point that Mog was trying to make.

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I FIND SO AT ODDS WITH MOG HERE!!! His comments are SO ambiguous and vague that anyone can interpret them just about anyway they want. Imagine the flaming a dyna would have with his rules.

Quote
And, to answer your question, Mog, no, you are not wasting your time coming here.  Even if you are 'retired', you are still a valued member of this community and always will be,,,

Everyone has their opinion, hehehe...

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #48 on: November 04, 2005, 11:09:49 am »


We talk and talk about having different kinds of campaigns with different rules (or less rules), and yet it never happens.  It's pretty much the same thing time after time now.  At the end of the day, I believe THAT is the point that Mog was trying to make.



Because it is the same 4 guys putting up servers.
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


Offline Mog

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 610
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #49 on: November 04, 2005, 11:43:56 am »
Can anyone else see the irony in this: " His comments are inflammatory to the EXTREME. " coming from Dizzy?  ;D

For the record, Dizzy, I have never advocated returning to the old, unfettered days of D2. My failing , if you like, is in hoping that players, by now, would play in a manner that doesn't exploit game mechanics, and not look for the slightest loophole, i.e. play to the spirit, not the letter. But that's just optimistic, wishful thinking on my part, it seems (see "win at all costs" mentality reference above).

As for me insulting those who have come up with the rules over the years, utter bollocks. That isn't my style, whereas you are quite an expert at it.

Players have left the game for a myriad of reasons, but I would wager the majority have left or lost interest because the game has become so restricitve, and at times resembles an old boys club.

" Imagine the flaming a dyna would have with his rules." Lololol. This coming from the self-stated master of flame wars back in those days. I can hardly believe the quantity of ironical comments that spew from your keyboard. No doubting you're funny.

Anyway, I can see the King of the Dyna doesn't want me here, so link is being removed from bookmarks, and bye all, have fun, catch my remaining friends on MSN sometime.
Merriment is All

Fear the Meow!

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #50 on: November 04, 2005, 11:47:39 am »
Actually Mog I'd hope you stay around (still owe a few beatdowns I think..Kitten)

But one of the statements you make is one that I dislike,
the reason the vast majority of players ahev left is because the game is
so old.
No other reason.
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

762_XC

  • Guest
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #51 on: November 04, 2005, 11:50:54 am »
Dizzy is "King of the Dyna"?

 :rofl:

el-Karnak

  • Guest
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #52 on: November 04, 2005, 12:41:16 pm »
Considering Mog's longtime standing in this community and his being a veteran from the earliest days of SFC, to see him treated as shabbily as he has been in this thread appalls me.  Dizzy, Karnak, I believe you both owe him an apology.  Your putdowns are childish and I would expect better from grown men.  Just because he hasn't played in a while doesn't mean that his opinion is any less valid.  He's trying to make a point.  You can agree to disagree with him and leave it at that.

You take things too seriously, and need to think a little more before you post.  Getting a sense of humor would help too.

:P :P  means I was joking.

 ::)

Being a longtime community member yourself, you should have realized that  Mog's Z-BCH was a really good addition to the community, so obviously Mog knows a lot about dynas.  I'm also on Mog's side when it comes to the "old boys club" which has damaged the game a lot in the past. It took someone open-minded like Frey that believes in the big-tent approach to breath new life into this ancient game and stop a lot of the political BS that used to go on around here. I would have to be pretty clueless to post a serious post saying Mog doesn't know what he talking about on dynas.  I think people know when I am serious cuz then my posts have a must nastier and ruthless businesslike tone to them. As a longtime community member, you know that

So, unless you have a personal reason to fly off the hammer like that then I recommend you to try to figure out what :P :P means next time before posting.

Posters like you really take the fun out of the game sometimes.  Oh well, it's Xmas time. That's always a happy time of the year. ;D

-karma to you for being a party pooper. :-\

Offline FPF-Tobin Dax

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #53 on: November 04, 2005, 12:44:44 pm »
Mog's Z-BCH  gave the mirak something that could actually counter a C-7. I'm glad I got a shot at flying it once. :thumbsup:
Suspected leader of Prime Industries, #1 Pirate Cartel

el-Karnak

  • Guest
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #54 on: November 04, 2005, 01:01:27 pm »
Quote from: Mog
Karnak, I find your rule 7 deliciously ironic. To see that coming from the biggest chucker of dolls out of the pram is highly amusing. How many times have you left the game since AOTK? I, frankly, don't care if you think my opinion is worthless; yours is of similar value to me.

 :smackhead:

Umm, it was a joke, OK?

:P :P means I'm not serious.  Even Die Hard knows when I'm joking!! ;D

This forums was so much funner when K'Rolling was around.  Maybe, I should go hang around EVE forums instead.

Anyway, I guess today is a day that you can't take a joke.  :-\

PARTY POOPER!!  :P :P

*sigh*

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #55 on: November 04, 2005, 03:13:37 pm »
Dizzy is "King of the Dyna"?

 :rofl:


I will be once I mop ur butt on the floor in our F-FDX v F-FDX match.  :flame:

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #56 on: November 04, 2005, 03:17:28 pm »
" Imagine the flaming a dyna would have with his rules." Lololol. This coming from the self-stated master of flame wars back in those days. I can hardly believe the quantity of ironical comments that spew from your keyboard.

I swear I have replaced my keyboard at least twice since those days... It must be something else...

762_XC

  • Guest
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #57 on: November 04, 2005, 04:04:05 pm »
OMG, pick some real terms.

BCH's or CCH's.

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #58 on: November 04, 2005, 11:05:04 pm »
OMG, pick some real terms.

BCH's or CCH's.

those are real?

Try 2263 CCs  ;)

762_XC

  • Guest
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #59 on: November 04, 2005, 11:29:19 pm »
Works for me.

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #60 on: November 05, 2005, 12:34:20 pm »
I'll be happy to play 2 matches. Originally I had wanted a 2v2... the top two guys from each team. But somehow someone got the idea it was a 1v1, which is fine too. I'll play both, may the best, most handsome looking captain(s) win.  ;D

762_XC

  • Guest
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #61 on: November 05, 2005, 12:43:41 pm »
You're on mullet boy!

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #62 on: November 05, 2005, 01:35:44 pm »
Who was 2nd place in pvp points on each team?

762_XC

  • Guest
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #63 on: November 05, 2005, 02:13:35 pm »
Coalition I would say almost certainly Duck - Alliance dunno, maybe DH?

Offline KBFLordKrueg

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3733
  • KBF CO
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #64 on: November 05, 2005, 04:55:40 pm »
Who was 2nd place in pvp points on each team?

Overall?...um...well..not usre...
I already threw away all my notes and paperwork except for the rules I printed... :-\
I can see my desk again... :)
Can't you check the Kill threads and add them up..?  :P
Lord Krueg
KBF CO
We are the Dead

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #65 on: November 05, 2005, 06:17:03 pm »
I'm the #1 seeded player from all 3 rounds from both sides. I shouldn't have to do anything. In fact, bring me some more bloodwine you sniveling Klingon K'taugh!

Offline KBF-Crim

  • 1st Deacon ,Church of Taldren
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 12271
  • Gender: Male
  • Crim,son of Rus'l
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #66 on: November 05, 2005, 06:27:04 pm »
I'm the #1 seeded player from all 3 rounds from both sides. I shouldn't have to do anything. In fact, bring me some more bloodwine you sniveling Klingon K'taugh!

Not true....you are now required to off yerself...by any means ncessary...

Now STFU...I'm kidding.... :P

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #67 on: November 05, 2005, 06:29:41 pm »
lol i got a negative karma, hahaha.

Bite me karma whores~!

Offline KBFLordKrueg

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3733
  • KBF CO
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #68 on: November 05, 2005, 07:42:34 pm »
See..See...that's what you get... :P
Bad Dizzy!
GUARDS! Take him to the Agony Booth for his just "reward"!  :P ;D
Lord Krueg
KBF CO
We are the Dead

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: Yet another server rule idea
« Reply #69 on: November 05, 2005, 07:51:07 pm »
lol

I think it was mog...