Topic: Unsticky Please

[Green]

1.  It was more of a dig then a request.    Afterall, we're saddled with DH and since the DNH isn't available, we kinda figured he'd be out of the C7 pretty quick anywho.  But if the PvP fleets are designed to be the loser fleets in the game...so be it.  We'll try to surprise you (and me).

2A.  Understand.  We are going by "size" of the ship (heavy, light, frig) as opposed to the "bpv".  No problems, the rule is clear.  It is based on class.

2B.  77-78...and (in GSA terms) that would be...late?

2C.  Sweet!

2D.  "Open Med Spd 8" is default.  Players can adjust if they mutually agree.  Okay.

2E.  Dyna or GSA...challenged choice...cool.

2F.  Ok, sounds good.

[Dfly]

for 2B-  In GSA it would have to be chosen as late to get the same ships that are available in KCW.  You would then choose med speed drones.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Might be fun to have a side competition for the most kills or the most challenge victories or victory/loss ratio.  Wouldn't effect the server but be a nice bragging rights competition.

[Bonk]

Really it's simple
1)If you fly for a House that takes territory you need to take territory to win. (same as any server)
2)There are VP points awarded for PVP- but not alot compard to what territory is worth so it's not like anyone will
cost their side th game by losing a few battles.
3)If you fly for a TER house you can pretty much decline any challnges you feel like.
4) Hexx is always right.

That I can handle... thanks for the précis. 

[Julin Eurthyr]

Some clarifications requested:

I'm believing that the "standard" D2 ruleset (concerning player behaviours etc.) is being appended.  Correct?

What's the rule for LoS and territory?  Is it whatever hexes you hold are yours, you need a LoS of "allied" houses tracing back to your space, or your house needs to hold an entire LoS?

I take it the folding of houses is not being done anymore, as there's no rules as to what will happen during the folds, correct?

While winging with a PvP pilot, are Territory pilots considered PvP pilots for any/all reasons?  Do Territory pilots earn the same amount of VCs for killing people, cost the same as a PvP pilot if killed, etc?  From the rules the only thing I got was that a Territory pilot is treated by the same disengagement rules as a PvP pilot if winging with one.

And instead of being Roxxors hexes, why not call them Imperial or Governmental hexes?  You know, the hexes that actually run the government we're trying to take over???

[Hexx]

Yep, players had best behave themselves as per normal rules, I'll find them from some old rule set & copy and paste.

No LOS is required ,tis all Klignon space.

House folding just added anotehr set of rules I'd have to try and balance.
I always reserve the right to change things up on the fly though.

TER pilots are treated as PVP pilots for the purposes of disengagement
(atm)
VP's are awarded per the pilots house.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

What is the need for a disengagement rule since the shiplist are all identical anyhow Hexx, we aren't using carriers and droners, with the line ship focus a disengagement rules will just serve to limit PvP.

[Bonk]

What is the need for a disengagement rule since the shiplist are all identical anyhow Hexx, we aren't using carriers and droners, with the line ship focus a disengagement rules will just serve to limit PvP.

Don't get me started....    (good question though)

[762_XC]

Oh hell, why even have a server? Let's all play the single player campaign and meet on GSA once a night.

[Bonk]

Can I login to your single player game and affect the map while you are not playing?  (Guess who'll be in a C7... )

[762_XC]

No, only Chuut can do that. 

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Oh hell, why even have a server? Let's all play the single player campaign and meet on GSA once a night.

Hexx can't capture you on GSA

 

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

It was my understanding that the disengagement rule was an effort to prevent hex flipping ships from running over the map.  With the exclusion of droners, carriers, escorts and marine ships, what we are left with are line ships and command variants, ie no Hexx flippers.  We have combats where challanges can be made, have limits on disengagement for PvP houses so why a need for a disengagement penalty.  If a territorial pilot disengaged from a hex, I'd think it would be in the PvP pilots intest to have them return once more and give them  another chance to earn PvP points.



I honestly just can't see any reason that a disengagement penalty would be needed, wanted, or enhancing the enjoyment factor of the server under these conditions.  I'd be more than happy to listen to any reasons other than unreasoned emotional comments.  Perhaps t00l can provide some points in favor, as he seems to implt there is a good reason to keep it on such a server setup.  Either way I'll play and be ok with any decision Hexx comes up with, its his server after all.  I just don't think a disengagement rule has anything to offer for a line ship vs line ship server when everyone is using the same line ships.  It would just encourage players to run in the largest packs they could muster and detract from the number of one on one matches.

[Riskyllama]

Oh hell, why even have a server? Let's all play the single player campaign and meet on GSA once a night.

Hexx can't capture you on GSA

 

Actually, this is untrue.
Captures can be done if you use "huge fleet" instead of "FFA"...unfortunately huge fleet requires there be only one pilot on team A.
Also some of the starting locations are a little close though. But if you need captures in a 1v1 or 1v2 or even 1v3 setup, you can have em on GSA.

[762_XC]

Droners are not the only hex flippers. Every ship can kill AI, some just do it better than others.

It's not about droners being contained as much as giving PvP a role in shaping the map.

And VC's are not a substitute for that.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Droners are not the only hex flippers. Every ship can kill AI, some just do it better than others.

The shiplist are identical for all sides thus a non factor I think.

It's not about droners being contained as much as giving PvP a role in shaping the map.

This IS a valid point  , however I think the map will be so large and the territories so mixed that I'm not sure it will be a big factor, especially given the no LOS requirement and the lack of mandatory missions.  On a more normal style server I think you have a good point here, just don't think it really applies to KCW.

You run a player off a hex but he can still move around the map unimpeded to get to anyother destination, having to keep track of scattered banned hexes all over the map (no LOS and no mandatories remember).  All that is really achieved is keeping the player off that one hex and forcing alot of paperwork as pilots try to keep track of what hexes they can't hit.  If a disengagement rule was to be used I prefer the idea of players being banned from the big VC hexes as these would likely be marked by a planet or base or something.  Those hexes would be easy to spot and to remember and be those that couldn't simply be circumvented.  A disengagement applying to those might be worthwhile, having it apply to open space seems cumbersome however, and might reduce good PvP opportunities with no real benefit.

And VC's are not a substitute for that.

In many cases you are correct but it really depends on the VCs as they could be for anything.

[762_XC]

VC's, honor points, attrition points, etc, do not have the tangibility that affecting the map does. That is why they will never be a substitute.

With the current rules and no disengagment rule, there is no reason to enter PvP EVER, unless you are challenged. (And once you're done with your requisite daily fight it's right back to flipping).

Until SQL gets running and we can do multiple DV shifts, the disengagement rule is necessary.

[Bonk]

I wonder if SQL is really necessary for higher DV shifts for PvP... the Base construction mission works just fine on the flatfile and does more to the map than just shift DV... I wonder if it might be used as a model for higher PvP DV shifts in plain old flatfile missions... hmmmm..... I'm working on updating the scriting API to VC8 right now... perhaps this will be my next project... (as updating the serverkit to VC8 is going to take a while and is our current task before conitinuing SQL work...)


Hmmmm....


edit: a hack might be to force a mission split (host left) at the end of an enemy PvP mission as this is known to result in a double DV shift if the split missions report the same result...

edit 2: another hack might be to leave the base placement DV boosts enabled in the GFs and have an enemy PvP mission place and remove a base...

Gotta get Tracey's feedback on this, I might be on to something here.... gonna post in the scripters forum...

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

With the current rules and no disengagment rule, there is no reason to enter PvP EVER, unless you are challenged. (And once you're done with your requisite daily fight it's right back to flipping).

False Statement Here is why:

PVP Houses
-will gain the majority of their VP points from winning PVP battles.
Defeating a pilot from an opposing PVP house is worth 3VP
Defeating a pilot from an opposing Ter house is worth 2VP
Chasing a pilot from a PVP house off (in even numbered battle) 2VP
Chasing a pilot from a TER house off (in an even numbered battle) 1VP



Territorial Houses

Defeating any Pilot is Worth 2VP
Chasing Off any pilot is worth 1VP

But I'll live with it if we use it not too much of a biggie, just alot of silly paperwork for some keeping up with scattered hexes all over the map.  Get stopwatches and notepads ready 

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

A bit OT but related a bit to the VC shift issue.

Wondering it it would be possible for DV shifts to take into account Hull class, so that losing a DN would affect the DV more than losing a smaller ship, seems like a reasonable us for multiple DV shifts in my book. 

For example 1 shift for beating ai, 3 for a PVP va a frigate, 4 for a light cruiser, 5 for a heavy, 6 for a bch, etc.   Line ships could be considered a hull class or 2 down as they are easier to replace.  Would a distinction by hull class be possible with SQL?