Topic: What have You Liked /Disliked on KCW

[Hexx]

Oddly enough while I have been trying vainly to get the life in order thing working  I've found my self constantly
thinking of new server setups- while it's true DH has (again) decided never to have anything to do with one of my server concepts
You'll all be subject to another one of them someday. (Hiya Bonk....)

Odd- I still have very little interest in actually playing the game, but I've got so many server setups I want to try out..

Anyway- I was going to post this question in the Civ war development forums- but thought I'd let everyone have a shot (since I really
don't feel like giving all of you access.. I'm lazy, sue me)

What did you like/dislike about KCW?
Please- -I'm not looking for debate between any of you- this is for my own knowledge, please post WHAT you liked/disliked
and WHY .
ie "the rules were dumb" -Not so helpful "This rule was dumb because xxx" more helpful

And obvious things such as "Rules kept changing for first few days" "Rules were contradictory and incomprehensible"
"Server admin ran off crying " are all givens.

What I'm looking for is
1) Things to never ,ever try again
2) Things to improve upon
3) Things to keep
4) Things that I should have done

Being me I (of course) don't promise to actually agree with everything said, but I'd still like to hear it.
(and yes, I'm actually more interested in what people hated than what they liked)

Thanks in advance for anything you can throw down.

[Dfly]

Loved :

The overall concept because it is different

The smaller map

The fact that there was so much untouched space, gave us room to grow in shapes we did not expect

The 5 point hexes all over(almost all over) because no more 50 missions just to get it to 0

The PvP concept of GSA IP or map.  more options for especially for those not on enough to build big cash

The .5 in nebs,

The shiplist because there is no Dreads only type stuff that only nutters(me included sometimes) can afford

Seeing so many online at a time, and everyday still having some on.  Including a mess of new pilots.

Bounty system

The comradarie by all sides

Hated:

The shiplist because it is not changing at all(actually I dont mind it, but i might by end of 3rd week)

The lack of updating goals for the map and fleet updates(wished it was on, so to see how it goes)

DH's attitude that he wants nothing to do with your server stuff ever again, but keeps flying, including his C7 that he said would be parked for duration (Just poking fun at ya DH, no harm meant).

and I am sure there are more things for both sides I am forgetting,  but above all:  it is fun

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Like list

1. Equal shiplists (aside from bugs keeping the D5W and D7L out of some House's shipyards)
2. Vanilla flavor, at least pending no expansion into the realm of specialty ships midway through(not for every server but fun for an odd one)
3. Limited heavy metal
4. Tranferral of Bounties.
5. The map, it rocked, best one in a long time
6. Lower DVs on hexes for a more fluid map
7. Combination of PvP and Map VCs, hard to get it right but you got pretty close on the balance
8. Territorial and PvP Houses with different engagement VCs and Map VCs
9. Not allowing fast drones.

Oh and my #1 favorite aspect:

You dared to try something different, Kudos to you Sir!

Dislike List
1. Karnak missions used with poor mission matching buggy terrain and out of era ai draws
2. Gamespy battles used without effect on prestige, the loser should have had to self destruct their ship upon return to Dyna.  The lack of this allowed pilots to fight unlimited big ship battles without ever having to contend with the conseqyences.
3. Losses not figuring into VCs, As it is now a House could have a losing PvP record vs all enemy houses and still win the server on purely PvP points.
4. Recent propossals to unrestrict ships, bad to change midway through, as midserver changes ARE THE WORST DYNA SIN.
5. Lack of hidden VCs as promised.
6. Vacant 8th House, likely couldn't be helped but was unfortunate
7.  Last minute switching of sides, I know several Kinshaya pilots had told me beforehand they had wanted to be allied to S'uhn'ih, yet their house was switched after they had committed.  Done with best intentions I know, but unfortunate.
8.  Lack of clarity regarding certain rules, the rules themselves weren't bad, but you needed a translator to make them more clear.
9.  should have been a shorter server 2 weeks is plenty.  2 weeks is fine with the limited list, making it longer is a bit boring, and opening up the shiplist later in the server just makes any victory of the cheapest variety, and any loss full of ill will.

[FPF-DieHard]

I've gone over what I liked . .

What I didn;'t like

1.  Too long.  3 weeks is too long for a "niche" server like this.
2.  No tech development
3.  Too many of the rule had no basis in logic.
4.  Challenges got boring after the first 2 days.  War is over assets, without assets the fights are stupid and pointless
 

[[KBF]MuadDib]

like:

i can go back to a hex if i die...
disengagements allowed when outnumbered...
the likelihood of finding PVP when wanted...

dislike:

disengagement time with most hexes maxing DV at 5...
the ultimate goal in the dyna is to control the map...having to deal with challenges when trying to obtain a map goal is frustrating...if i wanted constant PVP i would go to GSA...

[KBF-Netman]

like:

i can go back to a hex if i die...
disengagements allowed when outnumbered...
the likelihood of finding PVP when wanted...

dislike:

disengagement time with most hexes maxing DV at 5...
the ultimate goal in the dyna is to control the map...having to deal with challenges when trying to obtain a map goal is frustrating...if i wanted constant PVP i would go to GSA...

he has a point in the dislike part

overall , i think it's a lot of fun and chalenging and i like it very much

[FPF-Tobin Dax]

Liked the map, ship list.

I disliked the 5 DV hexes. Should have been at least 10, or made server one week. Wonder why the numbers dropped? What's the point when one strong day can change the map in a mjor way. No point in fighting to hold major assets when a house can nutter for a few hours.

[Dizzy]

1) Things to never ,ever try again

    Don't ever try another server again.

2) Things to improve upon

   Your commitment to finish admining what you started.

3) Things to keep

   Your day job cuz u suck at this.

4) Things that I should have done

   You should've listened to me.

hahaha! J/k!

Hexx, new ideas should always be tried. No SG server has ever had the same stuff. Its all evolved. Your server was more a revolution in a way. Total departure from what anyone was used to. I think thru the posts in this thread, new ideas will come to light that will find incorporation into future campaigns. Already I have a few of your ideas Im stealing. I guess thats the positive comment on the whole thing... Sorry its so general.

Negatively, you know what I'm gonna say. It should have been a one week server. People would be waiting at the login screen hitting refresh to try and get on. With no tech progression and so few ship choices, the server didnt have much else to keep its fire going. I think some peeps got bored with it.

Bottom line, you fish for ideas and cook what you catch the way u want. If you have too many chefs in the kitchen, its gonna taste bad. Even if it does, you'll do better next time. So keep at it, you seem to enjoy it, you masochistic fool.

One more thing. Question yourself on why it is you want to run a campaign, but not play it. I find that odd. Seems to me that'd be a requirement for an admin... to at least get involved in the actual gameplay.

[Sochin]

LIKED,
I liked the whole concept of the server except for the following.

DISLIKED,
Shiplist was a little too restrictive.

[FPF-DieHard]

the ultimate goal in the dyna is to control the map...having to deal with challenges when trying to obtain a map goal is frustrating...if i wanted constant PVP i would go to GSA...

Dib worded it better than I did, what he said is what I meant

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

It is notable that most of those that are playing the most are GSA pilots.

[FPF-DieHard]

It is notable that most of those that are playing the most are GSA pilots.

I'd credit that to the lack of variety and EEK missions.   The PvP fiends are just happy to be able to kill people.  The non-PvP fiends probrably got really bored with the lack of tech development and variety.  EEK missions don't bother the PvP fiends because they will fly the biggest ship they can any way.

[Julin Eurthyr]

To me, there's only one thing to comment on here, that hasn't been said before...

Dislikes:
The whole "each house for itself", combined with the "design balance".

To explain:
In the pre-server RP, it was mentioned that the various houses were allying with either the "sitting replacement Emperor" S'uhn'ih, or the traditionalist / Imperial House KBF (I can't really spell / remember their fancy Klingon name...).
However, when the server went live, it was "each house for itself", and there was no team goal / VC condition.  Combined with the fact that the serverkit mandates there be 2 "teams", this presented numerous problems, from the "no rotting fur" rule to the way the server panned out.
To top it off, while the "sides" wound up with a semi-equal balance between territorial players and PvP players, however, one team was "saddled" with 2 Territorial houses that were ultimately "at odds" with each other, while the other team had 1 house (therefore no internal conflict), which had more players than the other 2 territorial houses combined.
This led to a situation where one side focused purely on the aquisition of territory, while the other team's territorial houses needed to aquire territory with an eye on what their "ally" was going to do.
In hindsight, (as I hoped this setup would work out too), there should have been a "Team Goal" on top of the house goals.  IE, the winning house was still to be seated Emperor, and their "allies" would be the new council.  Also, the territorial houses should have been as equal as possible, (in both players and number of houses per side,) due to the fact that hex flipping is purely a numbers-related activity.
This way, the PvP houses could have supported the "team" cause by patrolling their territorial house's aquired territories (earning VCs from the kills & supporting the team), while the Territorial houses were free to land grab.  Meanwhile, each house would focus on performing their goals (from killing opponents for PvP or land-grabbing...)

In a way, I'm glad the "super secret screw your ally house VCs" weren't posted.  There was already enough divisiveness amongst the "allies", adding the extra mechanic might have caused some severe "house leader infighting"...

[Bonk]

You'll all be subject to another one of them someday. (Hiya Bonk....)

Hey!   

Lyran Civil War anyone?  (But Chuut's not allowed to fly LDR )

[FPF-DieHard]

You'll all be subject to another one of them someday. (Hiya Bonk....)

Hey!   

Lyran Civil War anyone?  (But Chuut's not allowed to fly LDR )

Mirak Civil war, in early!!!!  Might be fun for a weekend.

[Soreyes]

You'll all be subject to another one of them someday. (Hiya Bonk....)

Hey!   

Lyran Civil War anyone?  (But Chuut's not allowed to fly LDR )

Mirak Civil war, in early!!!!  Might be fun for a weekend.

Great!!!!!!!   OK DH you would be stuck in a Z-CL the whole server   

[GDA-S'Cipio]

Things I really liked:

I liked that everyone had the same shiplist.  Not something you want to see in many consecutive servers, of course, but it's really fun once in a while.

I liked that the different houses had different goals.  (Brought back fond memories of the race-specific VC's in early Canada West servers)

I liked the restricted shiplist.  I thought you did a fantastic job of deciding which ships to keep and which to ditch.

I liked the elimination of everything heavier than a command cruiser.    I could still fly a decent war cruiser (like my starter ship) and not feel totally outclassed, and even if everyone climbed into a D7W the war still felt "real".

I liked the map.  I loved the low wide open spaces.

I *think* I like the challenge systsem.  It's very fitting with TNG KCW that you are trying to model and adds a lot of flavor to the game, but I must admit I haven't had to deal with a challlenge yet.

I loved Bonk's installer.  Very well done.

I really love the fact that you took a different idea and made a server out of it.


Disklikes:

Well, I dislike that I was out of town on business during week 1 and didn't get to play.   In the future please call me before you launch and get my executivie secretary to double check my schedule.   She'll pick out a nice time slot for you.  (On the other hand, I'm one who's glad it went on for more than a week, or else I woudln't have gotten to play!)

I can see people's points about wanting a tech advancement.  I would suggest (in the future) that you fix this not by adding more ships to the war, but by staggering the ships you have.  For example, perhaps for the first few days you could have made the biggetst ship available  be the D6.  (It doesn't stink if that's what everyone else has.)  Then in a few days add the D7.  Then the B refits.  Then the K refits.  Then the W refits.

-S'Cipio

[Father Ted]

Things I really liked:

I liked that everyone had the same shiplist.  Not something you want to see in many consecutive servers, of course, but it's really fun once in a while.

I liked that the different houses had different goals.  (Brought back fond memories of the race-specific VC's in early Canada West servers)

I liked the restricted shiplist.  I thought you did a fantastic job of deciding which ships to keep and which to ditch.

I liked the elimination of everything heavier than a command cruiser.    I could still fly a decent war cruiser (like my starter ship) and not feel totally outclassed, and even if everyone climbed into a D7W the war still felt "real".

I liked the map.  I loved the low wide open spaces.

I *think* I like the challenge systsem.  It's very fitting with TNG KCW that you are trying to model and adds a lot of flavor to the game, but I must admit I haven't had to deal with a challlenge yet.

I loved Bonk's installer.  Very well done.

I really love the fact that you took a different idea and made a server out of it.


Disklikes:

Well, I dislike that I was out of town on business during week 1 and didn't get to play.   In the future please call me before you launch and get my executivie secretary to double check my schedule.   She'll pick out a nice time slot for you.  (On the other hand, I'm one who's glad it went on for more than a week, or else I woudln't have gotten to play!)

I can see people's points about wanting a tech advancement.  I would suggest (in the future) that you fix this not by adding more ships to the war, but by staggering the ships you have.  For example, perhaps for the first few days you could have made the biggetst ship available  be the D6.  (It doesn't stink if that's what everyone else has.)  Then in a few days add the D7.  Then the B refits.  Then the K refits.  Then the W refits.

-S'Cipio

Gotta agree with S'cippy. No need for D5D's, but a gradual progression from the D6 to D7W would have been more fun. Hell, on any given server, the Feds all count the hours till the CC+, and then CLC come out.

[Dizzy]

I disliked:
1. rule changes midstream

Peeps need to totally STFU about this sort of sh*t. I'm so FREAKING tired of this BS about the players feeling screwed cuz the admin changes a rule. STFU and play or not. STOP bitching about it. I SWEAR TO GOD that if I have a buncha peeps talk smack to me about mid server rule changes that happen in the future it will be the name of my next server!

S
T
F
U
!

[KBF MalaK]

I disliked:
1. rule changes midstream

Peeps need to totally STFU about this sort of sh*t. I'm so FREAKING tired of this BS about the players feeling screwed cuz the admin changes a rule. STFU and play or not. STOP bitching about it. I SWEAR TO GOD that if I have a buncha peeps talk smack to me about mid server rule changes that happen in the future it will be the name of my next server!

S
T
F
U
!

play NOT it is

[Father Ted]

I don't have a problem with mid-server rule changes that correct a glaring problem. What I, and most other players do have a problem with is a rule change that alters the course of a campaign. It hasn't happened in a long time, but players have long memories for shenanigans by admins. I'm not saying you were the admin in question, because you weren't(actually, you've always been a fair, impartial, and honest referee), but there is one who abused his position(at least in my view) on a server to benefit his side. Anybody who's been around long enough will probably know what I'm talking about. 

[GDA-S'Cipio]

Peeps need to totally STFU about this sort of sh*t. I'm so FREAKING tired of this BS about the players feeling screwed cuz the admin changes a rule. STFU and play or not. STOP bitching about it.

Not gonna happen.  Players sign up to play a game.  If the game suddenly changes after the starting gun goes off, they are going to be upset.  It's just human nature, is to be expected, and nothing is ever going to change it.

-S'Cipio

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

People like to play a game as advertized, if you advertize an aspect of it, then change it midserver it isn't the same game they had expected and they have every right to be unhappy about it.  I repespect an admin who sticks to the script unless it is a problem of a technical nature or agreed upon by all the RMs or at least a majority of them.

[Dizzy]

Something you blokes dont get... the server admin makes the call based on the good of the whole, not the few. So when a mid server rule change hits, play or not. Stop the bitching. The admins are freaking tired of you buncha whiney asses and you know exactly who you are.

If you babies cant get past a little correction to clarify something or stabilize something, and decide to quit in protest, then you guys dont really need to be in this community. There isnt room for you here. Go play some other game. I'm tired of players like you. In fact, future servers might need to be invitation only.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Clarification or stabilization is a fine reason for a change, throwing off the campaign flavor is not IMHO.  Sign-up for a light cruiser hell server and then battleships being allowed is an extreme example, but surely you can see why it might not appeal to some people if such a change was made.

[762_XC]

In fairness to the admins, not every consequence of every rule can be anticipated in advance. If something is so obviously broken that it is going to kill the campaign, it needs to be fixed.

[Dizzy]

In fairness to the admins, not every consequence of every rule can be anticipated in advance. If something is so obviously broken that it is going to kill the campaign, it needs to be fixed.

Thank you tool.

[762_XC]

STFU and give me some karma!

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

And you have to be fair to the players as well if at all possible, especially the RMs who are put in a bind when such changes occur.  

No RM would feel comfortable leaving his/her team, yet to find that the flavor of a campaign changed and wasn't what they had agreed to RM in the first plkace would be placed in a difficult and utterly miserable position.

[762_XC]

What if the RM's all agree to the change?

[GDA-S'Cipio]

Clarification or stabilization is a fine reason for a change, throwing off the campaign flavor is not IMHO.  Sign-up for a light cruiser hell server and then battleships being allowed is an extreme example, but surely you can see why it might not appeal to some people if such a change was made.

I think I'm in exact agreement with Chuut here.

Or, to quote Steven Cole afater the players finally beat some sense into him, "There really is a big difference between errata and addenda."

-S'Cipio

[FPF-DieHard]

Something you blokes dont get... the server admin makes the call based on the good of the whole, not the few.

Not true, I prefer to cheat for my side (yet my side usually looses, must learn to cheat better . . .)

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

What if the RM's all agree to the change?

I would have no problem whatsoever with this situation.  Any average player would have the iption of quitting, RMs really don't have that option without a huge sense of guilt.

[Father Ted]

What if the RM's all agree to the change?

As I said, if it's to correct a major problem that all teams agree needs to be addressed, no problemo. It's when the rules are changed mid-stream that alter the course of a campaign that we have a problem. As I've said, it hasn't happened in a long time, because the backlash was so vicious the last time it happened, but to those of us flying that server, we keep a cynical eye on those mid-server rule changes.

[FPF-DieHard]

What if the RM's all agree to the change?

From what I've seen in the RM forums, this is a bad idea.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Clarification or stabilization is a fine reason for a change, throwing off the campaign flavor is not IMHO.  Sign-up for a light cruiser hell server and then battleships being allowed is an extreme example, but surely you can see why it might not appeal to some people if such a change was made.

I think I'm in exact agreement with Chuut here.

Or, to quote Steven Cole afater the players finally beat some sense into him, "There really is a big difference between errata and addenda."

-S'Cipio

Why I have always LOVED your servers Scippy.  I know what I'm getting before they start and you have the balls and integrity to keep with the origional plan, popular or not.  You build it the way you like it and as people to play if they want or not, but keep faith with those who do.

[762_XC]

What if the RM's all agree to the change?

From what I've seen in the RM forums, this is a bad idea.

It saved GW2 from certain death.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

What if the RM's all agree to the change?

As I said, if it's to correct a major problem that all teams agree needs to be addressed, no problemo. It's when the rules are changed mid-stream that alter the course of a campaign that we have a problem. As I've said, it hasn't happened in a long time, because the backlash was so vicious the last time it happened, but to those of us flying that server, we keep a cynical eye on those mid-server rule changes.

Yup

And last time it happened I know we lost a whole fleet of players and a few odd other ones.

[FPF-DieHard]

What if the RM's all agree to the change?

From what I've seen in the RM forums, this is a bad idea.

It saved GW2 from certain death.

I'm refering to the aftermath of GW2 in that forum.

[762_XC]

As I recall that was over issues unrelated to the change.

[GDA-S'Cipio]

Another thing I've noticed that I like a lot.

Two nights ago, I was involved in taking a planet from the enemy and then boosting up its DV after I took it.  I noticed that during the boosting phase, the only missons I dre were Planetary Defense.

I don't know if this was an exceptional night, or if this has been the rule, but I really, really liked it.   it was still easier to defend than it was to attack, but attackers with extended Assault missions weren't facing defenders with two-minute patrols.

If this is repeatable and intentional, I'd be interested in learning how it was done.

-S'Cipio

[Dizzy]

No RM would feel comfortable leaving his/her team, yet to find that the flavor of a campaign changed and wasn't what they had agreed to RM in the first plkace would be placed in a difficult and utterly miserable position.

Admins exersize plenty of delicacy and sensitivity to the issue, to the server and to the players (and to their own reputation and well being)when contemplating a mid server rule change. Players do not. Players dont even think about the big picture. They are only concerned with winning and what suits them best. SO they can just STFU for all I care. Hah, you wont see me making a mid server rule change and check myself cuz Malak is on the server.

Like I said, and I wont say it again, these whiners have had their day and that day is over and they can now stfu.

[762_XC]

Server admins gone bad!

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

I just hope that an admin can follow Scippy's example and have the balls to stick with the origional plan.  If you don't get the turnout, or the result youy want learn from it and do it different on the next server.  Changing aspects that aren't a technical problem relating to stability and the like only diminish that admins reputation.

[Julin Eurthyr]

On the RM / GW2 issue:

Rarely, if ever, are all the RM's in agreement as to a mid-server rule change.  Considering that no RM, in their right mind, will approve a rule change that hurts their team, I don't find that surprising at all...

And the debates to get a rule-change to earn unanimous approval can (see GW2), get quite nasty...

Meanwhile, the rules lawyers among us seek out every loophole to gain advantage, and unless the rules are written air-tight (I haven't seen an airtight set yet...), something's got to give in order to keep the server-flavor going.  Hence the need for periodic rule-changes...

[Dizzy]

I just hope that an admin can follow Scippy's example and have the balls to stick with the origional plan.  If you don't get the turnout, or the result youy want learn from it and do it different on the next server.  Changing aspects that aren't a technical problem relating to stability and the like only diminish that admins reputation.

I disagree chuut. You are basically damned if you do or dont. Sometimes if nothing is done the server turns into an AI shootout. How fun is that? Sure, I'd piss off a few players (even a handful) to keep the server going. THAT is what takes balls. Not sticking to your guns to be self righteous. You have no idea how few and far between servers are and how difficult and arduous they r to develop to see them go down the drain when something can be done to keep it alive.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Rules clarifications are ok and this is where the Admin has a valid role.  Rules changes without unanimous consent are where an admin loses credibility.

[Dizzy]

Admins cant lose credibility. They dont have any to begin with. 

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

I disagree chuut. You are basically damned if you do or dont. Sometimes if nothing is done the server turns into an AI shootout. How fun is that? Sure, I'd piss off a few players (even a handful) to keep the server going. THAT is what takes balls. Not sticking to your guns to be self righteous. You have no idea how few and far between servers are and how difficult and arduous they r to develop to see them go down the drain when something can be done to keep it alive.

Terry Schiavo  was kept alive for quite a while as well, they should have pulled the plug long before they did.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Admins cant lose credibility. They dont have any to begin with. 

Scippy does and so does Capt. Jeff 

[Father Ted]

Admins cant lose credibility. They dont have any to begin with. 

You sell yourself short. Having been on the working end of SS2, I have more than enough admiration for all admins. What Chuut and I are saying is that we don't argue with a needed rules change, but change for change's stake in the middle of a server, especially if it favors one side, will piss off many more players than it will please.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Admins cant lose credibility. They dont have any to begin with. 

You sell yourself short. Having been on the working end of SS2, I have more than enough admiration for all admins. What Chuut and I are saying is that we don't argue with a needed rules change, but change for change's stake in the middle of a server, especially if it favors one side, will piss off many more players than it will please.

BINGO!

[KBFLordKrueg]

Likes:
Good PvP action with heavy VCs for successful battles.
The bringing together of pilots who don't normally fly together.
DisLikes:
Territory map rules flip-floping (ie-Nebs were worth, 10@, then became 5, opposite for asteriods) after campaign had started.
IMPHO, rules really need to be set in stone before a campaign starts...an old discussion, no sense in details....

All in all, still an enjoyable campaign.  

[762_XC]

On the RM / GW2 issue:

Rarely, if ever, are all the RM's in agreement as to a mid-server rule change.  Considering that no RM, in their right mind, will approve a rule change that hurts their team, I don't find that surprising at all...

And the debates to get a rule-change to earn unanimous approval can (see GW2), get quite nasty...

Julin, no offense but your memory is a little faulty here. The rule change on GW2 hurt the Alliance, and I was the Alliance RM who approved it. The debate lasted about 5 seconds. It was not a difficult decision; the original rules (LDR run amok) were so badly stacked against the Coalition it was practically a no brainer.

Meanwhile, the rules lawyers among us seek out every loophole to gain advantage, and unless the rules are written air-tight (I haven't seen an airtight set yet...), something's got to give in order to keep the server-flavor going.  Hence the need for periodic rule-changes...

This however, is a VERY good point.

[KBF MalaK]

Likes:
Good PvP action with heavy VCs for successful battles.
The bringing together of pilots who don't normally fly together.
DisLikes:
Territory map rules flip-floping (ie-Nebs were worth, 10@, then became 5, opposite for asteriods) after campaign had started.
IMPHO, rules really need to be set in stone before a campaign starts...an old discussion, no sense in details....

All in all, still an enjoyable campaign.  

thats exactly what I'm saying, but since I've only played all of 3 missions on the server (the second day) before deciding it was funked I have NO reason to whine. But I did sign on with the intention of actually playing and every time I decided to try again, there we're different rules. No offense Dizzy, many liked the server, I did not. So I deleted my post so YOU wouldn't go off on any of my other items on the don't like list.
No accusations
NO blaming
NO finger pointing

Why you get so crazy ?? who knows. It wasn't me

[Hexx]

Something that should be said about rules changes- sometimes they're needed simpy due to the players.

One of the "infamous" ones- concerning the LDR on GW2 was required, because J'inn believed that the community
would police itself, that not an overwhelming number of players would sign up for the LDR cheeseboats.
(the poor man disagreed with me here, senility was obviously already setting in)
Once he was proven wrong , and far more people signed up to fly LDR than he expected a change was required.

In that case an admin thought he could throw something extra in for the community, and that the community would be responsiible
enough not to sign up in droves to fly the uber ships, he was wrong, they did, it screwed part of teh server up, and then people
got pissed when he tried to fix it.

Of course it worked out in the end, as I got to tell him "I told you so"... of course then he had DH screw up the damn yards for the LDR..

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

GW2 cost us the SSCF.

There were better ways to handle the problem there than the way it was done.  Glad some enjoyed it after the fix, personally I'd have preferrred to keep the players and lose the server, but just my opinion.

[Hexx]

Without opening another debate about it, or blaming the SSCF (as there were of course other people involved with the LDR stuff)
GW2 was a situation where a group of players decided not to announce they were flying for the "uber" race when J'inn
asked people, then decided to fly it when the server actually started.

I'm disappointed players left over it, but at least some of those who left contibuted to the problem, and could have helped avoid it
entirely if they'd just said who they were flying for beforehand.

Heck I was supposed to be leading the LDR (<sigh> The "Chairman Hexx" days...) and J'inn had told me I'd have less than 10 pilots for the whole thing.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

If I remeber correctly the SSCF had indicated before the server that they planned to fly LDR

[762_XC]

Not exactly. Hooch planned it as something of a kitty Pearl Harbor. Unfortunately it worked a little too well.

The SSCF was not the only issue. The Coalition was drawing LDR AI most of the time, making their missions a nightmare. Another unintended consequence.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

The Coalition was drawing LDR AI most of the time, making their missions a nightmare. Another unintended consequence.

LDR ai isn't a big problem in non Karnak missions, pulling those would have likely alleviated much of that difficulty.  But I agree that aspect was something that had to be fixed.  There was a need for a solution, but I think the wrong one was chosen.  Again, that is just a personal opinion.

[Bonk]

STFU and give me some karma!

 , done.

But allow me to say this:

The fewer rules the better. Less to remember, less that can possibly change, less deep thought required by admins. Less is more!

[Bonk]

Clarification or stabilization is a fine reason for a change, throwing off the campaign flavor is not IMHO.  Sign-up for a light cruiser hell server and then battleships being allowed is an extreme example, but surely you can see why it might not appeal to some people if such a change was made.

I think I'm in exact agreement with Chuut here.

Or, to quote Steven Cole afater the players finally beat some sense into him, "There really is a big difference between errata and addenda."

-S'Cipio

Why I have always LOVED your servers Scippy.  I know what I'm getting before they start and you have the balls and integrity to keep with the origional plan, popular or not.  You build it the way you like it and as people to play if they want or not, but keep faith with those who do.

Couldn't have said it better. Hear, Hear! 

(S'Cipio / Herr Burt has the advantage of considerable SFB knowledge and always makes his servers quite difficult for all... which is why they work)

[FPF-DieHard]

GW2 cost us the SSCF.

There were better ways to handle the problem there than the way it was done.  Glad some enjoyed it after the fix, personally I'd have preferrred to keep the players and lose the server, but just my opinion.

Ain't hindsight a bitch?

[KHH_Jakle]

Mirak Civil war, in early!!!!  Might be fun for a weekend.

That be flippin awesome....

[Hexx]

Mirak Civil war, in early!!!!  Might be fun for a weekend.

That be flippin awesome....

I think you mean awesome flippin....

[KHH_Jakle]

Bah - do it  just for a weekend, limit it to FF, DD, CL, CS hulls (specifically those - no other variants) and and treat the CC the way the C7 was treated for KCW.

[GDA-S'Cipio]

Mirak Civil war, in early!!!!  Might be fun for a weekend.

That be flippin awesome....

I think you mean awesome flippin....

 

+1 to Hexx

-S'Cipio

[FPF-DieHard]

Bah - do it  just for a weekend, limit it to FF, DD, CL, CS hulls (specifically those - no other variants) and and treat the CC the way the C7 was treated for KCW.

OMG you are twisted! 

I'll telll you what, you "pimp" for this and I will "make it go . . ."

[762_XC]

The DD would be uber in that shiplist. 

[Austin]

You should try a gorn/romulan boarder bash server! Yay!

I like how when the C7 dies, you cannot get it back. But they get back the C7 when the server resets, right?

I like phaser ships, make more pure phasers ships with 45 power 12 phaser Is, and like, almost no shields, but, no dizzies, and no Drones, but like 4 ADD YAY for phaser ships, (I guess this is technically a dislike)

I like how I can fart without anyone seeing/smelling/hearing it, even though I don't fart a lot.

I like how Dizzy has ballz

I like Ladyfreak ;-O

I like Lyran voices pretending to be klingons, so I can pretend that klingons are atleast half cool when they combine with the full cool lyran voices.

I like to eat ants.

I like Sponebob Squarepants.

I dislike how there is no Quadruple ADD New Heavy Cruiser which has no missiles. I LOVE ADD AND PHASER YAY!

---Plasma v Plasma next time, anyone? RomvGorn massacure!!! Just make sure you out fit the gorn with extra phasers, since hull means crap in plasma v plasma when your opponant has cloak.

[Laflin]

STFU and give me some karma!

 , done.

But allow me to say this:

The fewer rules the better. Less to remember, less that can possibly change, less deep thought required by admins. Less is more!

Freakin' heretical Blasphemer!  You will burn for those words! 

[Slider]

The Good

Great concept.
Removing Droners and line ships was better than i thought it would be.
Rules servicable: some adjustments needed but what the heck how many erratas does SFB have?
Map layout forces confrontations along key borders adding to the atmosphere.
98% of all PVP battles working nicely.

The Bad

Ship progression would have been nice due to length of server.

or

Shorter time spam I think 10 days spanning 2 weekends might have been nice.

The Ugly

Lack of player commitment: Teams are lobsided basically its KHH and a member or two from the other allies fighting KBF, Demons and 9th. Basically these teams have found a way to work together, while our 'commited" allies have left the building.

Last night on one hour they turned the number of hexes it takes us 12 hours to turn. We have no hex flipping houses to help. So all that can be done is to take our chances in challenges that are often rebuffed or avoided. (Demons not included in this statement.)

Enemy: Silly PvP person there is more to D2 than challenges and pvp.
Me: Not when your on the whole outmaned 3 to 1, and your only hope for points are battles not hexes.

Our allies instead of talking and working with us have just bailed from the server. Not a good way to keep the players around when the server is more to your liking and not ours. Comments to this effect have been met by "If you dont like it leave" retorts. Ironnically from teams with low commitment levels"

Final thoughts.
I loved the work and idea behind the server as I love this game. Too bad people only love the game when its to their specific definition of what a server should be. I would play a Hexx server again. I would hope for more balanced player participation.

[762_XC]

Don't read into too much Slider. You hit the nail on the head yourself; given the civil war concept and lack of tech progression (meaning almost every battle is the same), a lot of folks just got bored with it.

I still pop back on for occasional abuse, even though I hate (and suck at) Klingon.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Agreed, great concept for a 10 day server, longer than that it just gets kinda stupid.

[Riskyllama]

Several things I would like to have seen on KCW:

     The secret VPs (Not put into play, just seen so we could find out how unreasonable/acheivable they might have been.)

     Some sort of major tech progression, be it a drone speed changes or maulers or fighters released, or something tha altered how the battles were played.Ii know the maulers and fighters were pulled to prevent cheesing, but battles did get repetitive. Also, being competitive(winning) against a top notch pilot in the most recent ship in the last days of the server in the ship i started in was rather odd to me, but fun. (Score one for the D5L.)

     Some sort of ruling on what happens if you lost a E3/G2 in PVP...since its part of a 3 ship fleet, is it worth one VP, 2, or all 5? Or is it exempt or anything?
This is the one reason that we didnt see any 3 E3s vs a FWL in nebs in my opinion.

     A more balanced map setup as per this: Not being able to atack people sitting on the edges who are getting a fleet together to jump you is stupid. The map needed to be arranged in a manner that didnt allow pilots to sit on the edge thumbing their noses at you.  The location of bases and stuff, while in my opinon was somewhat slanted, but still fitted with the fact Tracey's house was the one that had all the power and holdings.

    More plasma. Plasma is your friend Hexx. Embrace it.

    More RKLYs in PvP. They just needed to be there...

    Not being able to eliminate purple once and for all. We're klingons! Who says what we can and can't attack? Oh right the admin....
Several times my newer wings and allies were gearing up to attack purple base stations (yes the homespace ones) until they were told they couldn't.

     Solid rulings that stick. Rule changes suck. Also rules changes need to be done at a certain time point that everyone knows about, not the second the post goes up. This keeps everyone on the same page, not flying on two different ruses sets.  Finally, rules are set by the admin, not house Khunt.

     The base assults in asteriod hexes seemed kinda laggy for some players. Is there any way to trim a few rocks off the back side or somethng?

[KHH-MiniMe]

    Not being able to eliminate purple once and for all. We're klingons! Who says what we can and can't attack? Oh right the admin....
Several times my newer wings and allies were gearing up to attack purple base stations (yes the homespace ones) until they were told they couldn't.

   

Know how ya feel on that one....with KBF right next to us and also an actual Klingon Fleet....I wanted to eliminate them during the first non weekend period when KHH had more people with no PvP opponents and turned to hex flipping....after a bit of an encroachment into KBF space...we were told to back off
A) bases off limits....rules
B) lets not take all KBF space...it might have a demoralizing effect and we're a PvP house and need targets.

while being contrary to my aggressive nature this strategy makes sense.....given the rules.....it's stupid to eliminate a PvP house....makes the other house the only game in town.

Once again biatches...on your knees

ALL HAIL EMPEROR DUCK!

[KHH-MiniMe]

The Ugly

Lack of player commitment: Teams are lobsided basically its KHH and a member or two from the other allies fighting KBF, Demons and 9th. Basically these teams have found a way to work together, while our 'commited" allies have left the building.

Last night on one hour they turned the number of hexes it takes us 12 hours to turn. We have no hex flipping houses to help. So all that can be done is to take our chances in challenges that are often rebuffed or avoided. (Demons not included in this statement.)

Enemy: Silly PvP person there is more to D2 than challenges and pvp.
Me: Not when your on the whole outmaned 3 to 1, and your only hope for points are battles not hexes.

Our allies instead of talking and working with us have just bailed from the server. Not a good way to keep the players around when the server is more to your liking and not ours. Comments to this effect have been met by "If you dont like it leave" retorts. Ironnically from teams with low commitment levels"

yes...when out numbered it can get demoralizing. We talked about this....how a lack of allies.... in ways helped us... making it easier to get PvP.....and thats how KHH got the victory.....from a lot of good effort and great flying from great guys like Slider

[Alphageek]

I have to say I liked the limited shiplist for KCW.  The only campaign I'd played before this one was Island Wars on D3.  The obsession with having uber-ships was really off-putting.  I had to have one just to protect myself from everyone else.  On this campagin though, it seemed more realistic.  "Civilian" Klingon Houses wouldn't have access to BB's and other cutting-edge military hardware.  On the whole, I give KCW:  4 Gay Thumbs Up!