Topic: SG6 Rules Discussion Thread

[Dizzy]

Yeah ok, we'll wait till it all works. Probably best that way. We will get it up this weekend and begin testing. There are a few specific things that need going over. Im glad we all agree not to rush it. I want it to work out of the starting gate as much as the next guy.


1. New ED missions that need some checking out. These neww missions will thrill.
2. OCI stuff. Needs a good workout and this includes it all... web page functionality, character options, RM features, map editing, shipyard function, web warping, kill page... all of it.
3. Some other areas of testing will be making herr burts Squadron Commander II PF Flotillas work seamlessly with the rest of the shiplist. This is a tall order because the shiplists are largely incompatible and will take major work to integrate it. After going thru it I'm thinking a simpler version of it will be in order.
4. The map and where all the terrain and hexes are going needs to be looked at. We can use the web page for this. Gotta make sure planets end up only in empty hexes.
5. The usual, making sure all the missions affect the dv's properly, all the ships and models work, all that.

[KBFLordKrueg]

Yeah ok, we'll wait till it all works. Probably best that way. We will get it up this weekend and begin testing. There are a few specific things that need going over. Im glad we all agree not to rush it. I want it to work out of the starting gate as much as the next guy.


1. New ED missions that need some checking out. These neww missions will thrill.
2. OCI stuff. Needs a good workout and this includes it all... web page functionality, character options, RM features, map editing, shipyard function, web warping, kill page... all of it.
3. Some other areas of testing will be making herr burts Squadron Commander II PF Flotillas work seamlessly with the rest of the shiplist. This is a tall order because the shiplists are largely incompatible and will take major work to integrate it. After going thru it I'm thinking a simpler version of it will be in order.
4. The map and where all the terrain and hexes are going needs to be looked at. We can use the web page for this. Gotta make sure planets end up only in empty hexes.
5. The usual, making sure all the missions affect the dv's properly, all the ships and models work, all that.

RE: 3  If there turns out to be major issues with the integration, IMHPO, better to drop that aspect of it in favor of using the many other new things. 

[NuclearWessels]

Yeah ok, we'll wait till it all works. Probably best that way. We will get it up this weekend and begin testing. There are a few specific things that need going over. Im glad we all agree not to rush it. I want it to work out of the starting gate as much as the next guy.


1. New ED missions that need some checking out. These neww missions will thrill.
2. OCI stuff. Needs a good workout and this includes it all... web page functionality, character options, RM features, map editing, shipyard function, web warping, kill page... all of it.
3. Some other areas of testing will be making herr burts Squadron Commander II PF Flotillas work seamlessly with the rest of the shiplist. This is a tall order because the shiplists are largely incompatible and will take major work to integrate it. After going thru it I'm thinking a simpler version of it will be in order.
4. The map and where all the terrain and hexes are going needs to be looked at. We can use the web page for this. Gotta make sure planets end up only in empty hexes.
5. The usual, making sure all the missions affect the dv's properly, all the ships and models work, all that.

Whew!   I was sweating a bit at the thought of just a day or two of testing... the interaction of new missions with ships in all eras is always worth checking (not that my missions would ever be flawed of course  )

dave

[Dizzy]

RE: 3  If there turns out to be major issues with the integration, IMHPO, better to drop that aspect of it in favor of using the many other new things. 

Right. I'm not waiting more than a week to make sure it works. It either will for SG6 or it will for SG7. 

[KBFLordKrueg]

I finally took the time to really take a good look at the rules posted, and offer my thoughts and comments on a few.

- Black Hole hexes are free hexes that exempt players from both the Disengage Rule and ship VC's. Just have fun in these hexes.
If a Capitol ship is lost in one of these, can it be then replaced at 0 cost?
Or is it gone for good?

Fighter CnC
No other fighters restrictions other than the ones posted? Or more coming?

Bounties!
Do these need to be posted publicly?
Or simply recorded in the Appropriate sides forum?

Bases
IMOPO, Bases need to be ridiculously expensive to prevent them being dropped dropped all over the map.
Realisticly, they would be just that and rarely placed anywhere they could be in real danger.

- If you are forced to Disengage in a PvP match, then you are banned from the hex you either took the mission in or were drafted in and all the hexes adjacent to that one for 15 turns. If your ship was destroyed then you are banned from that hex and all adjacent hexes for 8 turns.

Being run out of 7 hexes at a time EVERYWHERE is NOT going to go over too well with the general population of players, methinks. 
How about that applies to planets and possibly bases only?
Not to every single hex on the map...
I doubt that will do much to encourage some to fly during this campaign...

Wild Geese

I've never been a big fan of this, period.
And of all the times it's been implimented in the rules, I've only seen it actually happen once...
We shall see how it plays out...
I can see where constant shifting of sides by players may cause ill feeling and resentment amoug the side whose players are forced to switch when you're making real progress. 


- If you disengage or are destroyed in a game and there are others still fighting, you may not leave the game until the match is finished.

I hope this can be enforced, since it still seems to happen way more than it should. 


I also assume we'll have forums on sfc.net...?

2. OCI stuff. Needs a good workout and this includes it all... web page functionality, character options, RM features, map editing, shipyard function, web warping, kill page... all of it.

I'm really liking using many of these on The Forge, looking forward to this aspect of it being used here.
RM features...? 
Like what?

*deposits 2 cents*

[Dizzy]

- Black Hole hexes are free hexes that exempt players from both the Disengage Rule and ship VC's. Just have fun in these hexes.
If a Capitol ship is lost in one of these, can it be then replaced at 0 cost?
Or is it gone for good?

Of course its not free. It will cost whatever pp to buy it back. But buy it right back you may. There will not be a penalty of any kind in these hexes. I'll detail it just that way.

Fighter CnC
No other fighters restrictions other than the ones posted? Or more coming?

I dont think so.

Bounties!
Do these need to be posted publicly?
Or simply recorded in the Appropriate sides forum?

Like I said, Im not doing bounties but will be happy to include them in the final numbers should you and tool agree on a method to track and implement them.

Bases
IMOPO, Bases need to be ridiculously expensive to prevent them being dropped dropped all over the map.
Realisticly, they would be just that and rarely placed anywhere they could be in real danger.

They will be. And the news, should peeps be wary of it, will betray their location. Spies, orion pirates and all sorts of clandestine forces consipire to work against the secrecy of placing them. This will give the nutters something to do.

- If you are forced to Disengage in a PvP match, then you are banned from the hex you either took the mission in or were drafted in and all the hexes adjacent to that one for 15 turns. If your ship was destroyed then you are banned from that hex and all adjacent hexes for 8 turns.

Being run out of 7 hexes at a time EVERYWHERE is NOT going to go over too well with the general population of players, methinks. 
How about that applies to planets and possibly bases only?
Not to every single hex on the map...
I doubt that will do much to encourage some to fly during this campaign...

Im not a fan either. Tool is behind this. However, from your response earlier in, I thought you supported this. I suggest you get together with tool and figure something out.

Wild Geese

I've never been a big fan of this, period.
And of all the times it's been implimented in the rules, I've only seen it actually happen once...
We shall see how it plays out...
I can see where constant shifting of sides by players may cause ill feeling and resentment amoug the side whose players are forced to switch when you're making real progress. 

After running 5 servers I dont give a frack how a few players feel. When has anyone asked how I fee? lol. 25% of my PM inbox is filled with hate mail... well, maybe 20%. No good deed goes unpunished but what isnt debatable is to let a landslide victory ever happen again on a dyna. I've been on both ends of an AI server and it aint fun on either side. So right when you feel you're making real progress, dont think that will translate into a runaway victory. I'll see to that. But your point is noted. If the geese swap an odd number of times, I might look at awarding a planet equivalent VC point to the team that made the most progress and didnt need them. We'll see.

- If you disengage or are destroyed in a game and there are others still fighting, you may not leave the game until the match is finished.

I hope this can be enforced, since it still seems to happen way more than it should. 

I simply need to be made aware of it. That is all.

I also assume we'll have forums on sfc.net...?

Im not sure who to ask about this. Capt Jeff perhaps? You'll need to look into that otherwise we may need to have an alliance and coalition froum here on these boards. I suggest you ask frey and or bonk.

2. OCI stuff. Needs a good workout and this includes it all... web page functionality, character options, RM features, map editing, shipyard function, web warping, kill page... all of it.

I'm really liking using many of these on The Forge, looking forward to this aspect of it being used here.
RM features...? 
Like what?

RM's will be able to assign ships to players. This may come in handy with special ships like conjectural designs, restricted ships, etc... We are working to also enable you to be able to change players locations on the map and possibly their prestige. We havent decided. But you think it we might implement it.

*deposits 2 cents*

We're not doing pennies anymore, please round up.

[NuclearWessels]

...
After running 5 servers I dont give a frack how a few players feel. When has anyone asked how I fee? lol. 25% of my PM inbox is filled with hate mail... well, maybe 20%.
...

20%?   20%???

<makes note to send Dizzy more hatemail>

Maybe I'll just cc you on the ones I send to Hexx and vice versa   

dave

[Hexx]

Dunno if it's what Krueg is getting at, ot it's been covered (damn meds) but
from what I can tell you can fly a full carrier (with 16 plasma fighters) and a casual carrier (with 8 plasma fighters) together.
By my math that's.. well it's alot of plasma fighters.

Now I know you and DH love flying those Gorn cheesboats, but I'd suggest maybe making the plasma boyz go 50/50?

That's a good little Dizzy.

[Dizzy]

U read the carrier rule wrong.

Here is MY rule: - Only one full or casual carrier is allowed with a wing, but with 2 wingmates, a full or casual carrier may be escorted by a casual carrier. A full carrier has 16+ ftrs and a casual has 8-15. A ship with 7 ftrs or less is treated as a regular line ship.

Here is DH's rule: - Use the ship class of CARRIER to designate a "carrier."  One BCH, DN, CVA, BB (if BBs are in) or CARRIER per fleet.

I havent decided which to use.

Afa all of the ftrs being plasma... well that means you have 1 or 2 shots and you're done. Those ftrs have nothing that can hit far away... and their defensive phaser suck pretty bad and they are SLOW. If you ever get hit by plasma ftrs its cuz ur too slow. I dont think they need a CnC cuz both sides have access to them and they arnt uber.

[Dfly]

U read the carrier rule wrong.

Here is MY rule: - Only one full or casual carrier is allowed with a wing, but with 2 wingmates, a full or casual carrier may be escorted by a casual carrier. A full carrier has 16+ ftrs and a casual has 8-15. A ship with 7 ftrs or less is treated as a regular line ship.

Here is DH's rule: - Use the ship class of CARRIER to designate a "carrier."  One BCH, DN, CVA, BB (if BBs are in) or CARRIER per fleet.

I havent decided which to use.

Afa all of the ftrs being plasma... well that means you have 1 or 2 shots and you're done. Those ftrs have nothing that can hit far away... and their defensive phaser suck pretty bad and they are SLOW. If you ever get hit by plasma ftrs its cuz ur too slow. I dont think they need a CnC cuz both sides have access to them and they arnt uber.

With the way your ruling works, I could fly for example a Hydran IC with 24 fighters, my wing may have a casual carrier with his say 14 fighters on his CAV+ and my other wing can have a line ship with up to 7 fighters so perhaps the LM with 6.  That would make a fleet of 3 ships with a total of 44 Hellbore carrying fighters.  OUCH. 

As per DH, one carrier per grouping would make more sense to me.  The Hydrans do have the advantage of using say the IC with 24 and 2 LM with 6 each, which is still 36 fighters.  I realize the Hydrans must make use of fighters more than other races but thought perhaps mentioning them, or even the ISC fighters over the Rom fighters might be more poignant.

I do hope you go with DH ruling on this one, just an opinion.  Either way you will see me there.

[Dizzy]

The hydrans have 2x ships with 8 ftrs that arnt carriers. So they, according to DH's rule could field 24+8+8 = 40 ftrs. That's only 4 less than my way. Either way, the Hydrans own when it comes to fielding ftrs. That's their racial flavor.

Now lets take another race... the ISC. At most, they'd field 16 from a CVA. And then they are done with DH's rule. With my rule they could field another 8 for a total of 24. And that is about how every race would be.

Either way, both rules eliminate a group of two players flying carriers together which is why these rules are proposed.

In closing, my rule enables other races to close the gap somewhat on the Hydrans being able to dominate with so many ftrs. DH's rule exacerbates this problem, but at the same time it drastically reduces the amount of cheese in a mission to very manageable levels.

I'll let this simmer a bit till I hear back from the R/ARM's. I'm undecided, really.

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

K, I will be around for part of this server... This weekend is out for me though... I have a wedding to go to... will be back Sunday sometime...

First week of the server I can play... then off to Pennsic, but I will have plenty of time to fly since I will be off next week.

Dizzy, I like your CnC with regards to carriers. 

I know it will scare the bejeezus out of some people.

But think about this... t00l will never let us buy an H-IC b/c they are such a one trick pony....  now a pair of CAV's with Deadman in one of them is something to worry about though. (he is absolutely amazing in that thing)

I think the disengagement rule of the hex and surrounding hexes should be applied to planets and bases only.

[762_XC]

I would prefer DH's rule, simply because it's more logical to allow a Ranger or Mohawk to wing with a carrier. Honestly there aren't many Hydrans (aside from deadman) who like flying the true carriers anyway. Like Bear says, they are one trick ponies.

About the only time you'll see a big swarm like that is if we are base-busting.

[Dizzy]

I would prefer DH's rule...

Im sure you do, as it guarantees you will always have at least double the number of ftrs anyone else can field. I'd rather use my rule and just exempt the ranger and mohawk. They arnt defined as carriers anyway.

Edit: and then we are looking at serious lag issues as well I suspect. I'd never want to try and play against 40-44 ftrs. Thats insane. Can a match be played lag free that way?

[762_XC]

Did you bother reading, Dizzy? We don't use fleets like that.

It's not a big deal either way, but don't accuse me of being a race whore when I'm simply out for logic and simplicity. 

[Dizzy]

- If you are forced to Disengage in a PvP match, then you are banned from the hex you either took the mission in or were drafted in and all the hexes adjacent to that one for 15 turns. If your ship was destroyed then you are banned from that hex and all adjacent hexes for 8 turns.

Being run out of 7 hexes at a time EVERYWHERE is NOT going to go over too well with the general population of players, methinks. 
How about that applies to planets and possibly bases only?
Not to every single hex on the map...
I doubt that will do much to encourage some to fly during this campaign...

Obviously from your above comments... you wernt paying attention when you wrote this on page two:

The server needs to BALANCE between PvP and flipping. There are peeps who like both. Don't make the server all about one at the expense of the other.

FLIP FESTS ARE BORING. Make PvP count. ON THE MAP.

On this point, I strongly agree...

So which is it? You want 7 hex bans or not? Tool lobbied hard for this and I agreed after seeing what appeared to be you agreeing with him. So can we get this out of the way now?

[762_XC]

Krueg, remember this will be a huge map compared to the last one. I'm sure your pilots would like to fly something other than a D5D.

P.S. I can easily set up Alliance and Coalition forums here.

[KBFLordKrueg]

P.S. I can easily set up Alliance and Coalition forums here.

Here or sfc2.net, doesn't matter really.
Just need one somewhere.
TY, sir.

[KBFLordKrueg]

- If you are forced to Disengage in a PvP match, then you are banned from the hex you either took the mission in or were drafted in and all the hexes adjacent to that one for 15 turns. If your ship was destroyed then you are banned from that hex and all adjacent hexes for 8 turns.

Being run out of 7 hexes at a time EVERYWHERE is NOT going to go over too well with the general population of players, methinks. 
How about that applies to planets and possibly bases only?
Not to every single hex on the map...
I doubt that will do much to encourage some to fly during this campaign...

Obviously from your above comments... you wernt paying attention when you wrote this on page two:

The server needs to BALANCE between PvP and flipping. There are peeps who like both. Don't make the server all about one at the expense of the other.

FLIP FESTS ARE BORING. Make PvP count. ON THE MAP.

On this point, I strongly agree...

So which is it? You want 7 hex bans or not? Tool lobbied hard for this and I agreed after seeing what appeared to be you agreeing with him. So can we get this out of the way now?

Notice I said "on this point". Notice I also took out the rest of the post besides the ONE point I was agreeing with. 

Notice I also didn't say I personally was so much opposed to it as I think most players overall won't care for it.
Me personally, I still think having the "7 hex ban" would be fine for planets and bases. But, Not too terribly thrilled about it being for every single hex, tho.

[762_XC]

Well, let's try it. Personally I think if we exclude open space people will end up spending 80% of their time in flippers.

Anyway boards are up, Alliance and Coalition. RM's are set for access; I need a signup list before adding anyone else.