Topic: Researching - Your favorite/least favorite rule or ruleset for Campaigns

[GDA-S'Cipio]

Before I begin, let me say that it is impossible to encourage gang-banging more than it already is.  Unless strictly forbidden by a player-side rule, gangbanging will always be the best way to maximize firepower in a hex.

Now on to why the DV shift is a desperately needed option.  Consider this next section to be written by Herr Burt, the D2 admin.   

This makes perfect sense, however, this part:

Julin, solo player.  Ganked by 3xCB.  Julin only loses 1 DV due to "severe numbers issue".  Julin tries again.

Will make people want to keep the disengagment rule to make sure you're not allowed to try again... back to square one. The bottom line is that players who fly big ships want to exclude those in small ships from PvP and all the fun action on the front.

[gangbangs get 1 DV shift equal numbers get 5],

Feh.   That wouldn't be my response with the modified DV shift in effect.  I'd send in one ship to kill Julin and get 5 shifts while the other two run missions under him to get two more.  Julin is welcome -- nay, encouraged --to stay at the front and engage in PvP for as long as he wants.

If I were Julin, on the other hand, I'd look at my situation thusly:  I am one pilot, and if I keep going up against three ships I risk  handing over my empire 7 times as fast as if I did nothing.  Therefor I will either:
1)Try to watch the map and catch one of the attackers when isolated (defending my empire at 5 times effect)
2)Go get help
3)Go fight in another hex.

Note that option 1 is a direct counter to my preferred attacker strategy, and the result depends upon who wins the PvP.  In other words, PvP has an effect on who controls the board!

Item 3, (the disengagement rule) is still there, but it is *voluntary* at this point.  I could choose it or not after weighing the risks, but this is my choice and not some long list of hexs that I have to remember when I can and can't go into.

This is the best situation for the dyna and what I've always tried to encourage:  server side rules that make players live with the consequences of their choices rather than player side rules that force your choices, force you to memorize things, and cause arguements.

Bonk:  Before you decide that your DV rule will never replace the disengagement rule on a server, you should talk to server admins.   See if they are willing to give it a go.  I think that if you build it, the server will come.   

-S'Cipio

[762_XC]

Currently I just cannot envision a situation where senior players will not find some excuse to exclude casual players from the fun of joining the action on the front,

Dude, come on. Do you really think l33t players are going to tell n00bs to stay off the front? You might get one asshat who says something, then he will be promptly smacked down by the other l33t players for being a dork. Have some faith bro. Sportsmanship is not entirely dead.

Both sides will have a mixture of n00bs and veterans. It balances out in the end.

Besides, most of the map will still be controlled by Chuut and Soreyes when everyone else is sleeping. 

[IAF Lyrkiller]

Currently I just cannot envision a situation where senior players will not find some excuse to exclude casual players from the fun of joining the action on the front,

Dude, come on. Do you really think l33t players are going to tell n00bs to stay off the front? You might get one asshat who says something, then he will be promptly smacked down by the other l33t players for being a dork. Have some faith bro. Sportsmanship is not entirely dead.

Both sides will have a mixture of n00bs and veterans. It balances out in the end.

Besides, most of the map will still be controlled by Chuut and Soreyes when everyone else is sleeping. 

And dont forget this other KAT.

[FPF-DieHard]

Will make people want to keep the disengagment rule to make sure you're not allowed to try again... back to square one. The bottom line is that players who fly big ships want to exclude those in small ships from PvP and all the fun action on the front.

That is nonsense, it is to prevent the solo DF from over-running everything.   The DR gives PvP the ability to defend space, with no DR or Multiple shifts for PvP there is not reason to fly anything other than the best avalable flipper EVER.

Guess what ship I spent the most time in on SGO5?  A Z-DWD.  Why?  Because most of the time I was so badly outnumbered that I had to do whatever I could to be annoying and cut supply lines.  I knew in a Z-DWD I could do strategicly what I could not is a Capital ship, even with the DR I didn't care.  I could get blown up and hit one of the other 10 important hexes for 30 minutes and come back.

[FPF-DieHard]

Julin, solo player.  Tries to work front.  I-CC gets ganked by 3xCB.  Julin loses 3-5 DV.  Julin tries again.  Ganked by same 3xCB.  5 more DV gone.  Julin runs away frustrated that his single ship can't fight on the front and no other froggies are online (or his kids are, once again, keeping him off TS for "proper coordination").  Julin logs off for night.

If you keep sticking you schween in a toaster, don't be surprised if you get an electric shock. 

If you get chased out of a hex because a cariers battlegroup is sitting in there, don't come back without help.

[762_XC]

Remind me never to borrow your toaster.

[KBFLordKrueg]

Currently I just cannot envision a situation where senior players will not find some excuse to exclude casual players from the fun of joining the action on the front,

Dude, come on. Do you really think l33t players are going to tell n00bs to stay off the front? You might get one asshat who says something, then he will be promptly smacked down by the other l33t players for being a dork. Have some faith bro. Sportsmanship is not entirely dead.

Both sides will have a mixture of n00bs and veterans. It balances out in the end.

Besides, most of the map will still be controlled by Chuut and Soreyes when everyone else is sleeping. 

I usually have the opposite problem...
I order n00bs to the front, and get "But, I can't PvP, are you crazy?" 
I figure the first thing you have to do is learn what NOT to do...
Besides, how will n00bs ever learn until they try...? 
Everyone has to start somewhere. 

[Riskyllama]

I usually have the opposite problem...
I order n00bs to the front, and get "But, I can't PvP, are you crazy?"
I figure the first thing you have to do is learn what NOT to do...
Besides, how will n00bs ever learn until they try...?
Everyone has to start somewhere.

Heck on AOTK2, anytime I was going near the front, and I wanted one, I had myself a wing.
Good commanders will look after their new guys, make sure they get integrated, etc..

[GDA-Agave]

I usually have the opposite problem...
I order n00bs to the front, and get "But, I can't PvP, are you crazy?"
I figure the first thing you have to do is learn what NOT to do...
Besides, how will n00bs ever learn until they try...?
Everyone has to start somewhere.

Heck on AOTK2, anytime I was going near the front, and I wanted one, I had myself a wing.
Good commanders will look after their new guys, make sure they get integrated, etc..

Exactly.

I've escorted more than a few newer players up and around the battlelines.   You'd be surprised what you can learn from the new guys if you give them the lead and just fly cover for them.    New tactical ideas just happen sometimes.

Most newer players are encouraged to get their feet wet as soon as they are ready.   I think our community has done a much better job of welcoming in new players and helping them understand the differences of live PvP versus Gamespy or singleplayer mode.

 

[762_XC]

What Risky and Cuervo breath said. I'm more than happy to give n00bs whatever PvP training I can. I consider it a long term investment in the community.

Best place to do that is on the front lines.

[Riskyllama]

i was gonna put this up above but didn't. If rookies aren't having as much fun as vets, something is wrong. Yeah vets might win more than a rookie(noob means something else where I come from), but he should be getting the same enjoyment of flying exciting battles, making an impact, and stuff.

I dont think many people really realized there wans't the rule on KCW. I found myself following it unconsciously a lot of the time. On KCW after the much complained about rules change, there really wasn't a point to flying in  numbers, because you could go right back in if run out, and you wouldn't loose points if forced out alone. For the elite PvP pilots, beating up on everyone else should have been child's play and if more had showed up, this outcome possibly would have occured. This seems to me to be pretty stupid.

Honestly, I can see both the good and bad of a disengagement rule. Yes, smaller ships will get ganked. Yes a droner can move somewhere else. But it does at least force a drone flipper to consider whether or not they jump into a hex, especially if its an important one.

Perhaps "specialty ships" like the much loved, much hated droner could have the disengagement rule applied to just them. That way, when they are caught without a normal CnC wing and forced to disengage it would have an effect. It would be one step closer to SFB CnC, since if a droner were caught away from the "fleet" it would probably attempt to "disengage" anyways.

[762_XC]

Perhaps "specialty ships" like the much loved, much hated droner could have the disengagement rule applied to just them. That way, when they are caught without a normal CnC wing and forced to disengage it would have an effect. It would be one step closer to SFB CnC, since if a droner were caught away from the "fleet" it would probably attempt to "disengage" anyways.

This would be a great idea if all flippers were specialty ships. The reality is there are many line ships which do just as well - maybe not DF well, but well nonetheless.

[KBF-Crim]

Ohhh....ooh.... ooh... ohh

*does horshack impression*

 what if you took another one of Firesouls columbs in the ship list..designate different ship types , line, command, droner etc..assign a numarical value based on rarity and class....find the sum of attacker(rarity+class) Vs defender (rarity+class)...and crossed referenced the DV shift vs ship type?

A droner attcking a droner would only gain a shift of 1 (5-5=0) if sum +0 no modifer...shift of one...

A droner attcking a line ship would only gain a dv shift of 1 (5-1 =4 ) sum =>0  no modifier/ higher number is attacker/ shift of 1

But a line ship attcking a droner would gain a multiple DV shift...(1-5= -4)  sum <0 apply modifer / apply sum as modifier / lower ship is attacker / shift of 5 upon mission success

This is only off the top of my head for an example....I'm sure someone would have to decide on the proper numerical value for each ship and class...

Unless we can get the damn server to see each players BPV and modify DV shift based on that...

An SQL server could do this ..yes?

[FPF-DieHard]

I'm more than happy to give n00bs whatever PvP training I can.

Oh God, maybe we're better off telling them not to fly 

Best place to do that is on the front lines.

I could not disagree more, the basics at least need to be learned off line in IP or GSA games.

[Dfly]

I like the idea that Risky brought up about having HexFlipping ships classed as needing a DR while line ships and others dont need it.

I also believe that rookies who feel ready to try the front line be incouraged to do so, with vet wings.  Those rookies that dont feel ready should not be pushed to the front line.  Anyone who does not want to be there should have that right, and by the same token anyone who does want to be there should have that right.  Most times it works this way, but not always.

The best way to learn what the front line PvP is all about is to get your feet wet.  If they find it is too early for themselves after the first or 12th battle, then they can simply say they are stepping away from the front line for a while in order to gain more experience flying first.

I am in no way saying that practice sessions are to be avoided, because I love them too.  I just wish more of the rookies would be willing to get in on some of them.  When they happen we usually see 5 to 10 vets ready and only 1 rookie if we are lucky.  The practice sessions do simulate front line events, but again it is a simulation.  Get the practice, and the dyna PvP will be more comfortable the first few times.

[Dfly]

Also, Bonk, don't give up on the shift thing yet please.  I too would love to see it on a few servers so it can get either tweeked to what we as a whole are looking for, or dropped at that time if it does not work(but I doubt the last part).

[762_XC]

Best place to do that is on the front lines.

I could not disagree more, the basics at least need to be learned off line in IP or GSA games.

Of course they do - but they will learn things on the front that they will learn nowhere else. I didn't mean they should START there.

I'm more than happy to give n00bs whatever PvP training I can.

Oh God, maybe we're better off telling them not to fly 

I didn't say I would teach them Klingon.

[CaptJosh]

Bonk, don't you dare quit on this multiple DV shift deal. I have wanted this since I started playing SFC. It only makes sense. And that disengagement rule as it currently stands is at best a somewhat effective, but ugly ugly kludge. (Please note that as the grandson of two Hughes Aircraft engineers, engineers who worked there when it was all still run by "Uncle Howard,"  kludge is the ultimate downcheck on something.)

We need something that works better. This will. And as for the disengagement rule, well, that's up to the server admins, not the players.

[Riskyllama]

Perhaps "specialty ships" like the much loved, much hated droner could have the disengagement rule applied to just them. That way, when they are caught without a normal CnC wing and forced to disengage it would have an effect. It would be one step closer to SFB CnC, since if a droner were caught away from the "fleet" it would probably attempt to "disengage" anyways.

This would be a great idea if all flippers were specialty ships. The reality is there are many line ships which do just as well - maybe not DF well, but well nonetheless.

        Right, but the hex flippers that truely excel are mainly specialty ships, right?

        It might cause people to start using more line ships( I know, laugh with me here), which would mean that casual players might just see 5 people in M-MCCs that stick around and fight (more fun than...)and just 5 in M-DFs that run. This would be instead of the present situation of 10 guys in M-DFs that bug out when outgunned (when is a DF not outgunned? Tobin and Chuut can't anwser this.) and then switch into their battleships that they got the ability to buy after a single night of nuttering AI..

[GDA-S'Cipio]

While the DV shift adjustment is definitely an idea worth getting excited about  (Come on, Bonk, get excited again!) I think the DV shift ideas are getting too complicated for this point in time.

First, let's just hope we can get a server with different shifts for PvAI and PvP and find out if we can live without the disengagement rule.   Then perhaps we can bribe the programmer into some tweaks if we find they are truly needed.

-S'Cipio the Sssssslow