Topic: The official SGO6 feedback thread

[Lepton]

Did it have none before?  We seemed to think it fine before with a single hex ban for a PvP loss or disengagement.  I remember being driven out of any number of hexes in the past and forced to work elsewhere, just not necessarily a whole other theater.  Hell, even on SSII I think people were being driven off enough that they had to go to another front.  Was that not good enough?

[FPF-DieHard]

Did it have none before?  We seemed to think it fine before with a single hex ban for a PvP loss or disengagement.  I remember being driven out of any number of hexes in the past and forced to work elsewhere, just not necessarily a whole other theater.  Hell, even on SSII I think people were being driven off enough that they had to go to another front.  Was that not good enough?

SOrry, I mis-understood.   Didn't know you were talking about radius.  But I didn't think it wsa that bad on this server because the map was big enough and on MOST situations the front was wide enough

[Hexx]

I think the multiple hex disengagement rule worked OK on this server, but on an average size map
we really should go back to the one hex, (although keeping a ring around planets/bases works fine-imo)

Again (obviously) depends on map size and number of VP hexes

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

IMOHPO, I think the 1 hex radius ban should be limited to planets and maybe bases as well.

That has always been my position.  Kinda hard to "control territory" in a vacuum thousands of miles wide.

[Dfly]

I think the multiple hex disengagement rule worked OK on this server, but on an average size map
we really should go back to the one hex, (although keeping a ring around planets/bases works fine-imo)

Again (obviously) depends on map size and number of VP hexes

I agree.

[Lepton]

I don't know.  It seems a little too convenient to me that the one hex radius should suddenly apply to bases and planets when these are exactly the areas that have the most hot and heavy battles.  If you get banned from a ring hex of a planet, you are nearly out of that entire area and even more so if the mission was on the planet.  Why penalize players for wanting to be where the action is and make a contribution?  If space is so hard to control as this vast vacuum, then does any hex ban rule make sense at all and does it make any more sense near a planet or base?  I really think just the one hex is sufficient with the extra radius of banning.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

I don't know.  It seems a little too convenient to me that the one hex radius should suddenly apply to bases and planets when these are exactly the areas that have the most hot and heavy battles.  If you get banned from a ring hex of a planet, you are nearly out of that entire area and even more so if the mission was on the planet.  Why penalize players for wanting to be where the action is and make a contribution?  If space is so hard to control as this vast vacuum, then does any hex ban rule make sense at all and does it make any more sense near a planet or base?  I really think just the one hex is sufficient with the extra radius of banning.

I rationalize it thus:

Around planets and starbases there would be alot more military and civilian traffic, listening posts, perimeter defenses etc.   I've always been of the thought that the one hex radius ban around planets should be the planet hex and all the hexes around the planet no matter whether the mission itself took place on the planet r on a ring hex.  So if you got banned due to a mission in a ring hex you could still operate on hex further back from the planet but couldn't operate in the ring hex on the other side of the planet.

As for penalizing players who want to be where the action is, that is what the disengagement rule does, this is what it was designed for.  Whether or not you like it is another matter, but it was designed as a penalty for failure in PvP, it was designed to kick players out of hot areas, and a one hex radius around planets and bases means that it will be useful even for races with slower mission times.

 Imagine myself in a Z-DF droner assaulting a planet and Agave in a Gorn BF defending it with a one hex only disengagement rule and no radius.  I'm running missions underneath him 3 times faster than he is running missions, finally he says enough and sits rock and catches me making me run away.  He feels very satisfied with himself until he realizes I'm hitting a different ring hex.  So he goes and plays rock there.  Well not falling for the same trick twice (as if I'd fall for it the first time  ) I hit a different ring hex than where I see his marker.  He tries to jump me coming out of mission and after a couple of tries gets me again and I run away like Rosie O'Donnell from a whaling boat again.  I still have 4 ring hexes I can hit and by the time I'm banned from the last my ban on the first will likely be up and I can repeat the process with little penalty. 

Now Imaging the one hex radius bann centered on the planet.  He finally catches me for the first time, I run and I'm gone for an hour.  He can smile and relax and pat himself on the back for an hour until I come back in a Z-BF and blow him to spacedust if he is still around. 

[Hexx]

I don't know.  It seems a little too convenient to me that the one hex radius should suddenly apply to bases and planets when these are exactly the areas that have the most hot and heavy battles.  If you get banned from a ring hex of a planet, you are nearly out of that entire area and even more so if the mission was on the planet.  Why penalize players for wanting to be where the action is and make a contribution?  If space is so hard to control as this vast vacuum, then does any hex ban rule make sense at all and does it make any more sense near a planet or base?  I really think just the one hex is sufficient with the extra radius of banning.

I rationalize it thus:

Around planets and starbases there would be alot more military and civilian traffic, listening posts, perimeter defenses etc.   I've always been of the thought that the one hex radius ban around planets should be the planet hex and all the hexes around the planet no matter whether the mission itself took place on the planet r on a ring hex.  So if you got banned due to a mission in a ring hex you could still operate on hex further back from the planet but couldn't operate in the ring hex on the other side of the planet.

As for penalizing players who want to be where the action is, that is what the disengagement rule does, this is what it was designed for.  Whether or not you like it is another matter, but it was designed as a penalty for failure in PvP, it was designed to kick players out of hot areas, and a one hex radius around planets and bases means that it will be useful even for races with slower mission times.

 Imagine myself in a Z-DF droner assaulting a planet and Agave in a Gorn BF defending it with a one hex only disengagement rule and no radius.  I'm running missions underneath him 3 times faster than he is running missions, finally he says enough and sits rock and catches me making me run away.  He feels very satisfied with himself until he realizes I'm hitting a different ring hex.  So he goes and plays rock there.  Well not falling for the same trick twice (as if I'd fall for it the first time  ) I hit a different ring hex than where I see his marker.  He tries to jump me coming out of mission and after a couple of tries gets me again and I run away like Rosie O'Donnell from a whaling boat again.  I still have 4 ring hexes I can hit and by the time I'm banned from the last my ban on the first will likely be up and I can repeat the process with little penalty. 

Now Imaging the one hex radius bann centered on the planet.  He finally catches me for the first time, I run and I'm gone for an hour.  He can smile and relax and pat himself on the back for an hour until I come back in a Z-BF and blow him to spacedust if he is still around. 

 

Honestly I think that's the best example for it that I remember reading.

[Lepton]

I think the case you pose as an example is the exception not the rule.  The radius rule may well be a very effective stop gap to someone specifically flying a flipper, but it is my perception that folks in a hot area don't generally go into a hot area with a flipper as they know they can be easily kicked out of a hex.  I know that at least I don't do that.  I try to get into a ship that can hold its own if need be and I generally do not fly flippers.  I think this is also a case of vastly different playing styles.  You enjoy the two minute mission.  I do not.  Be that as it may, I really don't think people tend to fly flippers in a hot area.  Perhaps yours is a particularly Kzin perspective.  I could be wrong though.  Frankly, I wonder that you would champion a rule that would make your style of flying much less effective and therefore less useful.

[762_XC]

That is where you are incorrect Lepton. Flippers regularly worked the front lines on SGO5. I did it myself in a D5D and later in an MKE. It was extremely easy to run around people running in groups trying to hunt me down. If I did get caught I just went to the next hex. By the time I got caught again I was back in the original hex. Chuut totally knows what I'm talking about. PvP was so pointless on that server people simply called each other out to get battles. AOTK2 was much the same.

It was still done on SGO6 but less frequently as the radius rule made hunter-killer groups an effective operational asset as opposed to a waste of time. You may not have liked the Alliance strategy in using them, and I may not have done a good job micromanaging the front lines to coordinate flipper actions with HK groups. But the radius rule itself proved to be a great improvement in making PvP worthwhile.

P.S. Flippers will always be useful.

[Hexx]

I think the case you pose as an example is the exception not the rule.  The radius rule may well be a very effective stop gap to someone specifically flying a flipper, but it is my perception that folks in a hot area don't generally go into a hot area with a flipper as they know they can be easily kicked out of a hex.  I know that at least I don't do that.  I try to get into a ship that can hold its own if need be and I generally do not fly flippers.  I think this is also a case of vastly different playing styles.  You enjoy the two minute mission.  I do not.  Be that as it may, I really don't think people tend to fly flippers in a hot area.  Perhaps yours is a particularly Kzin perspective.  I could be wrong though.  Frankly, I wonder that you would champion a rule that would make your style of flying much less effective and therefore less useful.

Problem is there's a number of ships that do both D5D,NCD,plasma fighters,PlasmaPF tenders, Some Hydran ships, all do well at PVP and can run the 2- 2:30 minute missions.

[Lepton]

Hmm, I'd like to see someone run a 2 minute mission with some of the missions we saw on SG6.  Not possible.  Perhaps I have a skewed view as I tend to run solos.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Frankly, I wonder that you would champion a rule that would make your style of flying much less effective and therefore less useful.

I champion it only to a certain degree.  I have reasons for not liking any form of disengagement rule, but to make my preferred style of flying easier is not one of them.  If you are going to use a disengagement rule at all I think a sensable use is the best and not one that neuters it, nor one that makes it overly dominant.  I also prefer one that makes good roleplaying sense.  

I like hex flipping, but I enjoy the risk involved as much as the game effect.  If the penalty for getting caught is so insignificant that I can totally ignore it, it poses no great risk or challenge to me.  I like the danger factor, same with deepstriking.  Long before there was a no disengage for deepstriking rule I always followed it as it didn't seem right not to from both an honor and a roleplay standpoint.  I also never logged off behind the enemy lines to make continued deepstriking easier, I fought my way in and out each time, and will always do so barring some emergency or server downage that would prevent me staying on the server until my raid was finished.  I see hex flipping on the front the same way.  It is a challange with great risks and great rewards with a one hex radius around the planet/base.  Many would be easily caught, but with good planning, quick reactions, and at times unorthodox actions one can pull it off and have a blast.  If you take away the dnager and challenge it isn't nearly as enjoyable for me.  I don't want it neutered in the "hot" area if it is to be used.

As for the "non-hot" areas that aren't around the VCs, I don't see the need for a ban of larger than one hex.  Roleplay wise it is just open space, and gameplay wise, it is more new player friendly and more conductive to PvP.  

My biggest gripes with the disengagement rule has always been the following:

#1 it encourages gangbanging and discourages 1 v 1 fights

#2 it makes it much easier for an attacking force to knock a defending force off a planet or base especially when very few defenders are on and it is hard for them to wing up and effective counter.  And it is almost always the attackers who will have the numbers advantage.

#3 it prevents the "Epic" fights of old such as Pinky Gen on Strom Seasons I and II, Matsukasi's stand at the Citadel on Storm Season I, Deadman's stand at "Thermoplye" during IDSL, Fluf and My stand at Hex 42, 19 on AOTK I, The Battle for Sitay again Storm Season I, and Mertok from AOTK I where Fluf lost the greatest number of Capital ships in the shortest period I think I'll ever see.  Present day battles for one area pale in comparison to the bloodiness of those battles.  Some can be attributed to player numbers i'm sure, but this is not the only reason as I'd face the same pilots over and over again battling for one hex.  On Hex 42, 19 I think i only saw a total of 7 different foes in 18 hours of constant PvP and on our side it was only Fluf and I for most of it with Matsukasi an Maverick helping out fo9r a few hours.  Never had anything other than a 1 v 1 the whole time and my Z-CVS was never defeated.  Under the disengagemnt rule my foes would have simply gathered a hunter killer group togehter and driven me off immediately.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Hmm, I'd like to see someone run a 2 minute mission with some of the missions we saw on SG6.  Not possible.  Perhaps I have a skewed view as I tend to run solos.

My best solo times in the missions with 4 enemy ai  were about 3 minutes and 45 seconds in open space.  A little more if pirates were there as well.

[Lepton]

 

[Hexx]

Hmm, I'd like to see someone run a 2 minute mission with some of the missions we saw on SG6.  Not possible.  Perhaps I have a skewed view as I tend to run solos.

Again the solo missions (though rare) took me about 1:40-2:00 in a E4D, little longer in a D5D
Multiple enemy ships again took probably around 4 minutes or just there under, depended if the enemy weasled or not.
5 miuntes if I really messed up a drone wave or 2.


But again-those time are both with droners, flying the less specialized ships would take longer, and in one or two I had to disengage.

[762_XC]

I think it's generally agreed the mission pack for SGO6 was more difficult than is desired. Keep in mind this is the first time Dave's new pack has seen a full bore campaign.

[Lepton]

For this server and many another I would have liked to have seen the Wild Geese come out sooner.  As far as I can see, there is not a great objective criteria for activating the Geese and eventhough a numbers difference may be noted, the Geese tend to get activated a bit late.  So I'd like to propose a different geese mechanism that I wil call the immediate geese.  The immediate geese will be a group of players who would like to keep the server numbers even whenever they are on the server.  A player in this group would log onto a server and see what side is down players and then fly on that side to keep the numbers as even as he can.  These players would be people like myself who would merely like to play the game and have no particular race preference and just would like to make a contribution and have fun while providing a service to the server and the players on it.  As an inducement to join the immediate geese, I'd suggest that they be exempted from certain rules, one that comes to mind is the disengagment rule.  This might be particularly appealing to players that do not like the disengagement rule and thus can hex-flip or charge back into that damn hex for more PvP whenever they wish despite being run off or destroyed

[Dfly]

I have a suggestion.  IT is to perhaps help bring  back those memories of campaigns where the main battles were 1v1.  How about for 1 server, to see how it goes, and be different, we make it a no wings server.  If 2 or 3 from a team get a live player or more to fight, each team chooses the enemy to stay for the battle, and the others must leave the map and wait for it to be over, as in destroyed captured or disengaged.  Only the 2 ships fighting would have any disengagement ruling apply. 
This would allow wings to fly vs ai for easier time, and gaining points, while keeping all battles 1v1.  I realize that flying 2 or 3 on a team is fun, but for many a server now that ruling of having the most wings with the best ships has been the way.  Perhaps it is time for a duel them out 1v1 server.

[Dizzy]

For this server and many another I would have liked to have seen the Wild Geese come out sooner.  As far as I can see, there is not a great objective criteria for activating the Geese and eventhough a numbers difference may be noted, the Geese tend to get activated a bit late.  So I'd like to propose a different geese mechanism that I wil call the immediate geese.  The immediate geese will be a group of players who would like to keep the server numbers even whenever they are on the server.  A player in this group would log onto a server and see what side is down players and then fly on that side to keep the numbers as even as he can.  These players would be people like myself who would merely like to play the game and have no particular race preference and just would like to make a contribution and have fun while providing a service to the server and the players on it.  As an inducement to join the immediate geese, I'd suggest that they be exempted from certain rules, one that comes to mind is the disengagment rule.  This might be particularly appealing to players that do not like the disengagement rule and thus can hex-flip or charge back into that damn hex for more PvP whenever they wish despite being run off or destroyed

Id like to hear these kind of ideas, geese are admittedly loved and hated. Probably deserves its own thread. I havent heard if Jeff will use them on ss3.