Topic: Pseudo turn-based ISC conquest campaign?

[FPF-DieHard]

Through our hours of BSing on AOTK4, we came up with an idea of a pseudo-turn based ISC conquest campaign that might actually work.   This could be run on a Dyna that wouldn’t be 24/7, it would be up for a few hours a night and would primarily be a PvP server.

A “real” ISC conquest campaign could never work in the traditional D2 model because of hex-flipping and player numbers.   It would simply be retarded to try.  The ISC’s strong point is PvP, they are MONSTERS in that regard, especially in a fleet battle.  A turn-based game could work but is too slow to run and would never get off the ground.

So how do you get around this?  One simple, yet off the wall, rule.  Nobody is ALLOWED TO ATTACK ISC HEXES.  You can raise your DVs, you can defend the space the ISC is attacking, but you cannot counter-attack.  The Victory conditions for the ISC would be simple, conquest of the GW races.    The GW races victory would simply be to stop this from happening.

The idea behind this is to get PvP and lots of it.  Consider this a fun server, not a serious one, but try to win anyway.  In a serious D2 server, even ones like AOTK3/AOTK4 where we’re pretty much fighting over a 10x10 area it’s still often the best strategy to avoid PvP and attack where your opponent isn’t.  We all do this so nobody take offense to it.  The idea behind this is a simple slugfest, the only way to stop the ISC is to attack them where they are.

I’m thinking late era, 2283 start so we all have our cheese and the GW races have a prayer against the ISC.  Probably use a full, yet small OOB so killing something big will really matter. F&E style production model for re-building ships or we can just say F’it and not.  The fleeting rules will need to be adjusted and play-tested so this can get close to fair.

Is this worth pursuing?  Is there enough interest in this style of campaign?  Please post questions and comments as this hasn’t been fleshed out yet.

[Corbomite]

Whats this "we" stuff? I made one comment (as a joke) and you went off like a rocket!

People need to keep in mind that this would mean once a hex was ISC DV=1 that they could not attack it any more and the ISC would have no need to boost it. A system would have to be worked out for multiple missions at once resulting in the ISC flipping the hex, then Galactic Powers flipping it back to Neutral, then to an Empire color, back to Neutral etc.... Who owns it at that point? Perhaps a time frame of ownership like "The ISC must posses the hex for at least one turn" or something.

An on line player cap for the ISC would seem in order for something like this. If a majority of ISC are on the Empires have no hope as the ISC can attack where they aren't with no reprisal. Perhaps incredibly hard AI missions for the ISC only (if possible) could alleviate that issue somewhat.

It would seem that there would be no need to have VC's given to the ISC for PvP kills and disengagements, only for territory gained, but definitely PvP VC's for Empire kills and disengagements on the ISC. That way they can fight the bullies without having to worry about getting their bikes stolen. The same might be done for the Disengagement Timeout Penalty.

[FPF-DieHard]

Whats this "we" stuff? I made one comment (as a joke) and you went off like a rocket!

Come on, since when have I ever gone off on a tangent . . .

People need to keep in mind that this would mean once a hex was ISC DV=1 that they could not attack it any more and the ISC would have no need to boost it. A system would have to be worked out for multiple missions at once resulting in the ISC flipping the hex, then Galactic Powers flipping it back to Neutral, then to an Empire color, back to Neutral etc.... Who owns it at that point? Perhaps a time frame of ownership like "The ISC must posses the hex for at least one turn" or something.

Maybe once it's above DV2 ISC it can be considered "Pacified."

An on line player cap for the ISC would seem in order for something like this. If a majority of ISC are on the Empires have no hope as the ISC can attack where they aren't with no reprisal. Perhaps incredibly hard AI missions for the ISC only (if possible) could alleviate that issue somewhat.

We'll throw in a Kroma rule, players can go both ways.   If the ISC number gets above X people need to sign in as GW?   Maybe, need to flesh this out.

Tack a BPV increase (to be determine by playtesting) to all ISC ships and give the GW races AI real fighters and PFs.   That will slow the ISC down a lot.

It would seem that there would be no need to have VC's given to the ISC for PvP kills and disengagements, only for territory gained, but definitely PvP VC's for Empire kills and disengagements on the ISC. That way they can fight the bullies without having to worry about getting their bikes stolen.

That's a great idea.   The empires are fighting for their lives, if the ISC isn't.  "Optional wars" kinda don't sit well with democracies once the cost gets too high.  Most anit-ISC tactics require you to be suicidal anyway so you just have to yell "Leroy Jenkins!!!!" and charge.

I think the run-off points on AOTK4 were a failure.  We didn't get what I hoped we'd get out of it and all it did was piss people off.

[Corbomite]

People need to keep in mind that this would mean once a hex was ISC DV=1 that they could not attack it any more and the ISC would have no need to boost it. A system would have to be worked out for multiple missions at once resulting in the ISC flipping the hex, then Galactic Powers flipping it back to Neutral, then to an Empire color, back to Neutral etc.... Who owns it at that point? Perhaps a time frame of ownership like "The ISC must posses the hex for at least one turn" or something.

Maybe once it's above DV2 ISC it can be considered "Pacified."

You could literally have ten players running independent missions in one hex. Until people are caught in PvP and kicked out the hex will not stabilize. You need something unambiguous so the Empires know when to cut and run, even if it means running off the map in a mission just to save time.

[Lieutenant_Q]

I wouldn't worry about it until the next day.  Let the General War Powers run missions in hexes that flip that day.  When you take the server down at the end of the day, boost the DV of the hex to something like ten.  After that, then restrict their ability to run missions.

[FPF-DieHard]

I wouldn't worry about it until the next day.  Let the General War Powers run missions in hexes that flip that day.  When you take the server down at the end of the day, boost the DV of the hex to something like ten.  After that, then restrict their ability to run missions.

Too much work, seriously it's pain in  the ass to do DB edits.

[Corbomite]

Good idea, but that could involve a lot of hexes.

The ownership at the end of the day thing might work though.

[Corbomite]

Oh, and maybe no X-Ships for the ISC.

[FPF-DieHard]

If we went SQL, it wouldn't be that bad.   Heck, this type of war SCREAMS for it.  And our player population shouldn't cause the server to barf when we get less than 20 at the most.

With SQL we could do a real OOB and production as well.   I expect there to be a lot of attrition and high PvP with this model of server.

One thing that could cause concern is that lack of use for smaller ships.   With this type of a setup people's best bet would be to grab the biggest legal fleet possible and hammer away or sit rock when defending.  Non-stop heavy metal fights can get a little tedious.  I'd love to see K-D5LR, K-D5DR, K-D5KR (or if you're feeling "Blue" F-CLC, F-NCDR, F-NCLR) versus I-CSP, I-CLZ, I-CLZ  at once point in the server.  I'd like to come up with some kind of way for this to happen without being artificial.

Perhaps if a "small ship" fleet is kicked out of a hex they are allowed to return in larger ships (once)?  Maybe "small" ships must be the first to attack a  hex, kinda like a scouting party for before the main fleet arrives?     

[FPF-DieHard]

Oh, and maybe no X-Ships for the ISC.

I was thinking the only X-ships could be the F-CX and K-DX like they had in the original SFB.  Neither of those ships are OTT and interestingly enough cost 12 EP to building in F&E.  The same as an I-CCZ . . .

Rules for partial X-refits in SFB just came out, I need to order that book . . ., some of that might make sense here. 

[Corbomite]

Perhaps if a "small ship" fleet is kicked out of a hex they are allowed to return in larger ships (once)?  Maybe "small" ships must be the first to attack a  hex, kinda like a scouting party for before the main fleet arrives?     

It would be unrealistic to try and coordinate this. Perhaps there should be no loss of points or time if killed or chased off in anything smaller than a CA (for both sides). I know the Disengagement Rule was initially intended to keep small Droners at bay, but on this type of server they won't matter as much and if they keep dying they won't have enough to buy a ship after awhile (especially if you keep the replacement ship small and useless). You just have to make sure all missions count a Disengagement as a loss and correctly shift the DV.

[Lieutenant_Q]

perhaps make it so that small ships killed by small ships are worth more points?

[FPF-DieHard]

Perhaps if a "small ship" fleet is kicked out of a hex they are allowed to return in larger ships (once)?  Maybe "small" ships must be the first to attack a  hex, kinda like a scouting party for before the main fleet arrives?     

It would be unrealistic to try and coordinate this. Perhaps there should be no loss of points or time if killed or chased off in anything smaller than a CA (for both sides). I know the Disengagement Rule was initially intended to keep small Droners at bay, but on this type of server they won't matter as much and if they keep dying they won't have enough to buy a ship after awhile (especially if you keep the replacement ship small and useless). You just have to make sure all missions count a Disengagement as a loss and correctly shift the DV.

That could make sense.   Also, if we use full F&E OOB/production 80% of the ships built will be smaller than 1 move cost.

It also makes sense Killing ISC ships is worth VCs but dying isn't.  3 CWs on a suicide run might be able to nail a smaller escort ship before dying.

[el-Karnak]

If we went SQL, it wouldn't be that bad.   Heck, this type of war SCREAMS for it.  And our player population shouldn't cause the server to barf when we get less than 20 at the most.

With SQL we could do a real OOB and production as well.   I expect there to be a lot of attrition and high PvP with this model of server.

One thing that could cause concern is that lack of use for smaller ships.   With this type of a setup people's best bet would be to grab the biggest legal fleet possible and hammer away or sit rock when defending.  Non-stop heavy metal fights can get a little tedious.  I'd love to see K-D5LR, K-D5DR, K-D5KR (or if you're feeling "Blue" F-CLC, F-NCDR, F-NCLR) versus I-CSP, I-CLZ, I-CLZ  at once point in the server.  I'd like to come up with some kind of way for this to happen without being artificial.

Perhaps if a "small ship" fleet is kicked out of a hex they are allowed to return in larger ships (once)?  Maybe "small" ships must be the first to attack a  hex, kinda like a scouting party for before the main fleet arrives?     

I would use SQL.

[Lieutenant_Q]

Anyway you can make a certain mission a pre-requisite for any missions?

For example, you can't run any missions in a hex until a scout mission is run?

[FPF-DieHard]

Anyway you can make a certain mission a pre-requisite for any missions?

For example, you can't run any missions in a hex until a scout mission is run?

Not possible with this version of SFC, good idea for SFC4.

people, this is a peanut gallery post, a fishing expedition.   All ideas are welcome, even if you think this sucks please tell me why.

[Lepton]

Well, you know that I have suggested an all PvP dynaverse server since time immemorial and have been roundly shouted down.  "This won't work".  "You suck".  "We hate that idea."  If one of the dynaverse illuminati can suggest it and make it work, then I am all for it.  Just take every criticism that has been leveled at my suggestions in the past and figure out how to counter them.  That's all that was required of me when I made such suggestions.  So if you can do that, people will be on board.  If not, then you suck.

My one stipulation would be that DH and Corbo cannot be stacked up on the ISC side as this whole thing will be no contest.

Essentially, you are suggesting that we use the dynaverse as a game-matching service in lieu of GameSpy with the dynaverse database backend keeping track of things.  If it can be done, I am all for it.  At this point, I don't think that I will ever be participating in a standard dynaverse campaign again, so if we can get a PvP campaign going then that sounds great to me.

[FPF-DieHard]

Well, you know that I have suggested an all PvP dynaverse server since time immemorial and have been roundly shouted down.  "This won't work".  "You suck".  "We hate that idea."  If one of the dynaverse illuminati can suggest it and make it work, then I am all for it.  Just take every criticism that has been leveled at my suggestions in the past and figure out how to counter them.  That's all that was required of me when I made such suggestions.  So if you can do that, people will be on board.  If not, then you suck.

To be honest, it's because nobody suggested Corbo's idea of not being able to counterattack the aggressor.  I simply never thought of it, nobody else had either.  I don't think this rule would work for most campaigns either, but for an ISC invasion it's perfect.

There's nothing wrong with a hex-flipping server either, this is just something a little bit different we can try for a 2 week diversion.  People should look at it as PvP training/practice.

My one stipulation would be that DH and Corbo cannot be stacked up on the ISC side as this whole thing will be no contest.

This is negotiable.  As I stated earlier we will have to tweak the fleeting rules so this can be fair for all sides involved. 

Essentially, you are suggesting that we use the dynaverse as a game-matching service in lieu of GameSpy with the dynaverse database backend keeping track of things.  If it can be done, I am all for it.  At this point, I don't think that I will ever be participating in a standard dynaverse campaign again, so if we can get a PvP campaign going then that sounds great to me.

Cool, that's one skeptic sold, next!

[Leto Atreides]

i only see one problem. if it's based on a few hours per day, that's great for people in that timezone. there are people worldwide that play.

how about 2 shifts to alleviate the other side.

[KBF MalaK]

Fishing eh ?

Back in the day when I had time to play SFB I spent most of my time practicing convoy raids/convoy defense and battling monsters in vanilla Fed cl/ca's until I moved on to pirate ships. Since there's no 'real' pirate ships in OP (as well as no Tholians) I'm back to thinking about convoys-

If you're ISC hexes can't be flipped back to another race, where's the battles going to be ? The front.

I'm not thrilled with that situation as the frontline ships need supplies and repair and thats where I'd prefer to hit them. One may not always KNOW there are ships on the front but surely there's ships in the shipping lanes between the held planets, bases, distribution depot's, etc. I have yet to see a convoy escort mission in a D2 campaign and I think it has lots of possibilities for PVP action. What if you could starve a base hex or planet for a few weeks (in SFC:OP time), would the hex be abandoned by the ISC and revert back to neutral ?? Maybe capture a few cargo ships with supplies the non ISC races could use ?? maybe a diplomat or 2 ?? Capturing a few gucci weapons would be nice but as pirate ship option mounts aren't implimented in OP they'd be useless- unless you could sell them on the black market for PP points. These cargo ships are going to REQUIRE escorts manned by live players, and live players are going to raid these convoys as well as fight the heavies at the front lines. That should be enough to maintain a good balance of heavies and 'wolf pack' raiders.

Some editing will need to be maintained on the map to define the shipping lanes between captured facilities as well as some custom mission creation (I hope to be able to help with that) but I don't think much new content will need to be created (c'ept maybe a random cargo manifest for the convoys).

Just an idea.

[FPF-DieHard]

i only see one problem. if it's based on a few hours per day, that's great for people in that timezone. there are people worldwide that play.

how about 2 shifts to alleviate the other side.

Completely up to negotiations between the ISC Supreme Commander (ISC, who' of thunk it) and the Galactic Overload-Dictator(GOD, best I could think of off the cuff).

The entire point of this experiment is to NOT attack when your opponent isn't there, it's why I mused about the non-24/7 nature of the server.  Seriously, what's a GW race member supposed to do when no ISC show up?

[FPF-DieHard]

Fishing eh ?

Back in the day when I had time to play SFB I spent most of my time practicing convoy raids/convoy defense and battling monsters in vanilla Fed cl/ca's until I moved on to pirate ships. Since there's no 'real' pirate ships in OP (as well as no Tholians) I'm back to thinking about convoys-

If you're ISC hexes can't be flipped back to another race, where's the battles going to be ? The front.

I'm not thrilled with that situation as the frontline ships need supplies and repair and thats where I'd prefer to hit them. One may not always KNOW there are ships on the front but surely there's ships in the shipping lanes between the held planets, bases, distribution depot's, etc. I have yet to see a convoy escort mission in a D2 campaign and I think it has lots of possibilities for PVP action. What if you could starve a base hex or planet for a few weeks (in SFC:OP time), would the hex be abandoned by the ISC and revert back to neutral ?? Maybe capture a few cargo ships with supplies the non ISC races could use ?? maybe a diplomat or 2 ?? Capturing a few gucci weapons would be nice but as pirate ship option mounts aren't implimented in OP they'd be useless- unless you could sell them on the black market for PP points. These cargo ships are going to REQUIRE escorts manned by live players, and live players are going to raid these convoys as well as fight the heavies at the front lines. That should be enough to maintain a good balance of heavies and 'wolf pack' raiders.

Some editing will need to be maintained on the map to define the shipping lanes between captured facilities as well as some custom mission creation (I hope to be able to help with that) but I don't think much new content will need to be created (c'ept maybe a random cargo manifest for the convoys).

Just an idea.

Everything you presented above is good and hopefully we'll be able to see all of this implemented in SFC4.  I would love to see a Dyna where stuff like that has a reall affect on the game.   Could you imagine if a base had a stockpile of parts/drones/etc . ..  and if you cut off the convoy's the players couldn't supply?  That would be awesome and I'd love to see stuff like that implemented.

Raiding convoys and other behind the scenes mayhem works in the sense of a grand war but it's kinda out of scope for this idea.   In this idea, the GW powers win simply by STOPPING the ISC.  it's a simple slugfest.

[Corbomite]

My one stipulation would be that DH and Corbo cannot be stacked up on the ISC side as this whole thing will be no contest.

Yeah DH and I ruled so much together that our side lost 

Now your going to start telling people what they can fly and who they can fly with? We're to be punished for being too good? Why not just have DH and me as the entire ISC force?

[FPF-DieHard]

My one stipulation would be that DH and Corbo cannot be stacked up on the ISC side as this whole thing will be no contest.

Yeah DH and I ruled so much together that our side lost 

Now your going to start telling people what they can fly and who they can fly with? We're to be punished for being too good? Why not just have DH and me as the entire ISC force?

We'd need a 3rd . . . 

[KBFLordKrueg]

*deposits 2 cents*

One problem I see already with having the server up only for a few hours at a time is it restrict our player base even more...
I know DH is on Eastern time, but many are not. I know we have a significant number of west coasters who don't even get on line until the wee hours for the eastern coast.
Not to mention several players from the UK and Europe. It is still a global game, not just a local deal. 

RE: The comment "we're so good our side lost"...
Your side massacred us in PvP (well, a good portion of that was the disputed Run-off thing) but your side, specifically DH gained the most points in PvP.
Your side lost due to the complete lack of map points in round 2, period.
Had you had even 3 planets, it would have been a different ball game, you would have won easily.
Obviously, "hex flipping" is a part of any campaign if there are any points to be gained by territory possesion.
That takes time, again, having limited server time is going to be problematic for these objectives.

Guys, face it, this is not the player base of old, when you kept refreshing to look for an open spot on a server and 80% of players lived for PvP.
If that was the case today, we'd have a helluva lot more players on campaign servers looking to fight and server admins wouldn't feel the need to make rules about giving points for mere disengagement.  *jab, jab* 
IMOHPO, I believe any server revolving around scoring based solely on PvP will have an ultra-low population.

The question is, do you want to make a server appealing to a very small group, or do you want to make a server for the entire community to try and keep interest in this game alive...?

[FPF-DieHard]

*deposits 2 cents*

One problem I see already with having the server up only for a few hours at a time is it restrict out player base even more...
I know DH is on Eastern time, but many are not. I know we have a significant number of west coasters who don't even get on line until the wee hours for the eastern coast.
Not to mention several players from the UK and Europe. It is still a global game, not just a local deal. 

This would be a turn-based game PvP game that happened to take place on a Dyna.  NOT a hex-flipping contest.  There would be ZERO point in flying when your enemy isn't there, leaving the game up 24/7 would make no sense.  Yeah, not everyone would be able to make it but so what?  If you want to fight AI play single-player.

The "open" window would be I'm thinking 6 PM eastern to 2 AM.  Again this can be negotiated between whoever is running the sides but I seriously see no point in leaving a server up 24/7 when there is no point in one side attacking the AI.

It gives us a chance in to have PvP in a strategic context.  GSA is dead and with OP was stupid anyway with all the 450 ADV m00ks.  A true-turn based campaign won't fly either as it is too much work to coordinate.   This would be easier, you set production, assign ships using the OCI (or a spreadsheet and the Honor System if Flatfile), meet on the dyna for X-amount of hours to fight out the round.  Rinse, repeat.

The question is, do you want to make a server appealing to a very small group, or do you want to make a server for the entire community to try and keep interest in this game alive...?

If the majority of the the community wants to flip hexes, I honestly don't care anymore.   If I can get 3 players on each side for this, it's a go.

I'd rather poke my eye out with a rusty screw-driver than run/play on another hex-flipping server.  Having to fly 8-14 hours a day flipping hexes so my side doesn't get wiped off the map is a collasal waist of time and I will never do it again. 

[Corbomite]

RE: The comment "we're so good our side lost"...
Your side massacred us in PvP (well, a good portion of that was the disputed Run-off thing) but your side, specifically DH gained the most points in PvP.

Poor rules design and poor judgement by your pilots (i.e. failure to see the writing on the wall and disengage) does not make DH a one man VC machine. They seemed to have enough sense to disengage most times when I met them.

Your side lost due to the complete lack of map points in round 2, period.
Had you had even even 3 planets, it would have been a different ball game, you would have won easily.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda. The point is we didn't and we lost. That just proves my point that two good pilots don't make a whole lot of difference either way.

[FPF-DieHard]

Please keep AOTK4 out of this, that's the past.

What I'm looking to do is a turn-based Strategic game where the turns are played out on the D2.  It's NOT a D2 server.   That's how you have to look at it.

[Lepton]

My one stipulation would be that DH and Corbo cannot be stacked up on the ISC side as this whole thing will be no contest.

Yeah DH and I ruled so much together that our side lost 

Now your going to start telling people what they can fly and who they can fly with? We're to be punished for being too good? Why not just have DH and me as the entire ISC force?

I'm sorry if I don't want to participate in any ego-stroking event for the dynamic duo.  If you think that people will not show up when their side starts losing a hex-munching server, just wait til you two "gentlemen" start pwning everyone in your cheezy ISC BS.  I certainly won't be showing up for that crap.

[FPF-DieHard]

My one stipulation would be that DH and Corbo cannot be stacked up on the ISC side as this whole thing will be no contest.

Yeah DH and I ruled so much together that our side lost 

Now your going to start telling people what they can fly and who they can fly with? We're to be punished for being too good? Why not just have DH and me as the entire ISC force?

I'm sorry if I don't want to participate in any ego-stroking event for the dynamic duo.  If you think that people will not show up when their side starts losing a hex-munching server, just wait til you two "gentlemen" start pwning everyone in your cheezy ISC BS.  I certainly won't be showing up for that crap.

That won't happen either, if it starts being that lop-sided I'll suspend the campaign. 

The fleeting rules will be setup so the ISC's "pwnage" will be even. 

[Corbomite]

My one stipulation would be that DH and Corbo cannot be stacked up on the ISC side as this whole thing will be no contest.

Yeah DH and I ruled so much together that our side lost 

Now your going to start telling people what they can fly and who they can fly with? We're to be punished for being too good? Why not just have DH and me as the entire ISC force?

I'm sorry if I don't want to participate in any ego-stroking event for the dynamic duo.  If you think that people will not show up when their side starts losing a hex-munching server, just wait til you two "gentlemen" start pwning everyone in your cheezy ISC BS.  I certainly won't be showing up for that crap.

I didn't design the server, the rules or the ships. In fact I said the kitties had a long range fire advantage before it even started. I flew more Fed than I did ISC this server in a CAD+ most of the time and got drafted exactly once in it. Bad luck for you. Go whine in your beer somewhere else.

[Lepton]

Not talking about ATOK 4, bud.  I'm addressing what some could see as a rather transparent set-up for an all PvP server that would likely stack the deck for one side, the ISC, particularly if certain player combinations are permitted.  If DH and company are merely looking to humiliate more KBF fellows, I am not interested.  If we talking about setting up some interesting scenarios and playing them out while keeping some eye on balance and fun, then I am all for this particular campaign.

Basically, if it is going to degenerate into more back-biting, pissing matches, and dick measuring bull crap, count me out.

[Corbomite]

I have nothing to do with this campaign either. For the record I think its a horrible idea and had no real intention of playing on it. It sounds boring as hell. DH took an off handed comment I made and thought up this thing all by himself. I told him I didn't think anyone one would play, but that doesn't mean I can't come up with constructive ideas to make it work for those who might. The only reason I know more than anyone else is DH wouldn't shut up about it for, like, hours!

[FPF-DieHard]

Not talking about ATOK 4, bud.  I'm addressing what some could see as a rather transparent set-up for an all PvP server that would likely stack the deck for one side, the ISC, particularly if certain player combinations are permitted.  If DH and company are merely looking to humiliate more KBF fellows, I am not interested.  If we talking about setting up some interesting scenarios and playing them out while keeping some eye on balance and fun, then I am all for this particular campaign.

Basically, if it is going to degenerate into more back-biting, pissing matches, and dick measuring bull crap, count me out.

I have no need to measure my dick, bite anyone's back, or humiliate anyone (except Hexx who hasn't been around for months).  I'm simply tired of mindlessly flipping hexes.

I'll tell you what Lepton, I'll fully include you on the discussions regarding the fleeting rules when myself and the RM's negotiate this.  Please don't be so negative about this, this is what you've been looking for for years.

[FPF-DieHard]

I have nothing to do with this campaign either. For the record I think its a horrible idea and had no real intention of playing on it. It sounds boring as hell. DH took an off handed comment I made and thought up this thing all by himself. I told him I didn't think anyone one would play, but that doesn't mean I can't come up with constructive ideas to make it work for those who might. The only reason I know more than anyone else is DH wouldn't shut up about it for, like, hours!

Hey, if nobody wants to play that's fine.  It won't get off the ground.  A day or two of postings is all the time waisted on it. 

[Lepton]

Not talking about ATOK 4, bud.  I'm addressing what some could see as a rather transparent set-up for an all PvP server that would likely stack the deck for one side, the ISC, particularly if certain player combinations are permitted.  If DH and company are merely looking to humiliate more KBF fellows, I am not interested.  If we talking about setting up some interesting scenarios and playing them out while keeping some eye on balance and fun, then I am all for this particular campaign.

Basically, if it is going to degenerate into more back-biting, pissing matches, and dick measuring bull crap, count me out.

I have no need to measure my dick, bite anyone's back, or humiliate anyone (except Hexx who hasn't been around for months).  I'm simply tired of mindlessly flipping hexes.

I'll tell you what Lepton, I'll fully include you on the discussions regarding the fleeting rules when myself and the RM's negotiate this.  Please don't be so negative about this, this is what you've been looking for for years.

Whatever anyone decides is fine with me regarding fleeting rules.  I wouldn't have the first clue as to what to suggest on those issues.  If you can get people behind the idea, I will be there.  At this point, I don't know if that is a help or hindrance to the cause.  It seemed to me that you were pretty happy with the PBR rules to some degree.  You might just start with that to get things off the ground and actually see if people will show up to such an event rather than making extensive and complicated plans and finding no one comes to the party.  To my mind, the simpler the rules the better.

[Lieutenant_Q]

Seems to me this is great for PvP training.  Since I haven't had much of anything, if I have the time, I'll fly in it.

Personally I think this is something that would work well, as long as its balanced.  Obtaining, then maintaining the balance is going to be the tricky part.

I've got a big move coming up here, starting thursday, my internet wont even be back up until next week friday.  Possibly I'll be able to do some work on my Fed-Klink border  server idea during that time if I get the move down quickly.

[marstone]

Oh, and maybe no X-Ships for the ISC.

I was thinking the only X-ships could be the F-CX and K-DX like they had in the original SFB.  Neither of those ships are OTT and interestingly enough cost 12 EP to building in F&E.  The same as an I-CCZ . . .

Rules for partial X-refits in SFB just came out, I need to order that book . . ., some of that might make sense here. 

New SFB stuff, woo hoo, I thought they had switched over mainly to the new game.  Off to the starfleetbattles sight I go.

[Wraith 413]

 I'm interested in this concept, DH. 
 Maybe using Jakle's Fleeting rules would be helpful. Especially the 3-PPD limit for an ICS Fleet/Echelon.  How about "bonus points" for PvP matches in CL or smaller class ships?

[FPF-DieHard]

I'm interested in this concept, DH. 
 Maybe using Jakle's Fleeting rules would be helpful. Especially the 3-PPD limit for an ICS Fleet/Echelon.  How about "bonus points" for PvP matches in CL or smaller class ships?

Slider and I will be on TS tonight blowing things up and I'm sure we can BS about this to see if it's feasible.  Considering the reactions of half the "community" I don't think it will be.

[FPF-Paladin]

Well, I'm for it... open to any different structure campaigns really, but where this is targeted... hey it sounds fun and relaxing to throw ships at ISC invaders and try to stem the tide.  That whole scoring system would make it way less stressful (ISC, territory vcs, Others PvP) so even if we are  being cut down regularly, there's no huge stigma of having given away VPs or guilt involved... just rearm, take off again...

Anyhow I know it's in concept stage but I'm for trying it.

[Lieutenant_Q]

My two cents on PvP VCs.

Any ISC ships killed by GW ships of equal or lesser class, worth points.  (Could even convince me on the merits of going one step higher, like a GW BC killing a ISC CA, or a DD killing a FF)
No GW ships killed by ISC are worth points EXCEPT: DNs, BCHs, and X-Ships.  These units represent a rather large commitment of resources and the loss of even one would hurt the GW powers.

[Wraith 413]

 DH and Slider,

 Are you two going to be on GSA/TS tonight ?
 If so , set a time and I'll try to be there.

[FPF-DieHard]

DH and Slider,

 Are you two going to be on GSA/TS tonight ?
 If so , set a time and I'll try to be there.

Yes, I'll be there around 9 PM EDT.   We can talk about how to do this while we're killing each other.

[Wraith 413]

 Cool, that time should be perfect for me.

[FPF-DieHard]

Newest off the wall idea so you can tell me I suck . . .

First premise, in ISC Invasion, the Disengagement rule will be applied to the SHIP, not the pilot.  We will have as full of an OOB as possible.  Get kicked out in a Sparrowhawk, come back in a Firehawk.  Get killed in a G-CM, have your race leader assign you another one and you can got back into the hex.  The Attrition will be of an empires shipyards, not it’s space.

In a 3v3 situation it is quite possible, even with meticulously crafted fleeting rules, to have a situation where 3 good pilots can put together a fleet that just can’t be beaten (I-BBZ, I-CATZ, I-CATZ fits that category).  In traditional D2 you could fight around this, attack where they aren’t.   But in this style of a server you don’t really have that option, engaging the enemy is the only way to win.

So what can you do in this situation?   How do you win the un-winnable scenario? Do what Kirk did, cheat!

Well, Kirk didn’t really cheat in the Kobiashi Maru, he just reprogrammed the simulation so that victory is possible.  That’s what we have to do, “re-program” the nature of D2 so that a 3-ship Uber-fleet is beatable in a war of attrition.   How do you do that?  It’s easy; remove one of the least realistic parts of D2:  instant repair!

Insta-repair quite frankly is really silly.  When ships in the Trek/SFB universe get F’d up it takes months to fix, not just pressing a button.  Repair will no longer be available at starbases, since this isn’t possible it will be stopped by setting the prices for repair as prohibitively high.   This will be a turn-based campaign and real-repairs of a ship will require taking it off the frontline and it will need to spend some time in dry-dock and it will cost something in production points (to be determined . . .). 

At bases you will still be able to buy drones, shuttles, fighters (making carries worth their weight in gold, PFs will be handled differently), marines, mines, and spare parts to repair yourself in combat, but it won’t be the same.  Your “7th shield” won’t come back.   Hull, Excess Damage, Labs, Control Stations, ain’t reparable via the engineering panel.  Even if you have all of your weapons and power systems working a ship held together with chewing-gum and duct tape is going to start falling apart quickly once it starts taking damage.  CA ships and bigger are going to be rare so once they start taking serious damage from a few fights it will behoove an admiral to take that ship off the line.

So how does this balance out the 3-ship ubber-fleet?  CLs are going to be plentiful, these will make up of the ships in a fleet.  Suicide runs add up!  If you loose five D5 hulls to get a CCZ taken off the line it’s worth it!  Fighters, PFs, attrition units will be able to do the same.  I also think the first fleets to attack hexes will be CL/CW fleets as it just makes sense to start an invasion of a hex with the war cruisers.  Why risk damaging an expensive ship on the AI?

Questions?  Comment?  Demands that I take my meds?   

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

Um... need to get a computer that can run SFC:OP again... this is basicly what I have been looking for since I left STOC....

[KBFLordKrueg]

Insta-repair quite frankly is really silly.  When ships in the Trek/SFB universe get F’d up it takes months to fix, not just pressing a button.  Repair will no longer be available at starbases, since this isn’t possible it will be stopped by setting the prices for repair as prohibitively high.   This will be a turn-based campaign and real-repairs of a ship will require taking it off the frontline and it will need to spend some time in dry-dock and it will cost something in production points (to be determined . . .). 

At bases you will still be able to buy drones, shuttles, fighters (making carries worth their weight in gold, PFs will be handled differently), marines, mines, and spare parts to repair yourself in combat, but it won’t be the same.  Your “7th shield” won’t come back.   Hull, Excess Damage, Labs, Control Stations, ain’t reparable via the engineering panel.  Even if you have all of your weapons and power systems working a ship held together with chewing-gum and duct tape is going to start falling apart quickly once it starts taking damage.  CA ships and bigger are going to be rare so once they start taking serious damage from a few fights it will behoove an admiral to take that ship off the line.

So how does this balance out the 3-ship ubber-fleet?  CLs are going to be plentiful, these will make up of the ships in a fleet.  Suicide runs add up!  If you loose five D5 hulls to get a CCZ taken off the line it’s worth it!  Fighters, PFs, attrition units will be able to do the same.  I also think the first fleets to attack hexes will be CL/CW fleets as it just makes sense to start an invasion of a hex with the war cruisers.  Why risk damaging an expensive ship on the AI?

Questions?  Comment?  Demands that I take my meds?   

You might be onto something there...
Having a 50% damaged ship repair itself in seconds is most unrealistic.
And as long as you have plenty of smaller units to throw at them without worry of losing VC points, it just might work.
Obviously, more exact details on how this work will ned to be hammered out, but...
ya might have something...

[deadmansix]

 LOVE the Idea DH sounds like a hell of a lot of fun even for a one handed Hydran

 but I do have one request make the cost of Carriers reasonable would ya last few severs they were shall I say way over the top cost wise IMO

[FPF-DieHard]

 LOVE the Idea DH sounds like a hell of a lot of fun even for a one handed Hydran

 but I do have one request make the cost of Carriers reasonable would ya last few severs they were shall I say way over the top cost wise IMO

PP will not be used for purchasing ships, they will be built with "Empire money," I'll use the F&E term EP from now on for this.   Ship costs will be based off of the F&E costs, "Carriers" will be expensive but worth it (I'll explain in a bit). 

By CARRIERS I mean true carriers, not the casual carriers. So even the Hydran Ranger and Mohawk will not be considered Carriers.  The actually fighter compliments for CARRIERS and their fleeting rules are up for discussion (see a soon to be posted dissertation that I started at work today).

Here's why carriers will be expensive in terms of EP:  Replacement fighters will be free!  This is the F&E model, Carriers are nearly impossible to kill as the fighters abosorb damage first.  It kind of works like that in SFC, a CVD pilot sends in the fighters, the fighters die (or kill the oppoenent) and the carrier withdraws.  Since ships will NOT BE ABLE TO REPAIR in spacedock, free replacement fighters is a HUGE advantage, worth the cost.

Tentatively I'm thinking Carriers will have to have an Escort of the same race and a Line ships of any race in a fleet.  I expect the combat to be quick and brutal.  Send in the fighters and the escorts, yell BONZAI!!! and hope you can overwhelm your opponent.  The carrier escorts will be disposable and as per F&E, only will cost slightly more than a Normal cruiser.  The carrier should hide behind the Escorts and be prepare to hike up it's skirt if things go badly, but it will be able to return to that hex later or return with a full compliment of fighters in another hex (and hopefully with a new escort).

Show up and Dnet TS tonight if you need me to elaborate.

[GDA-S'Cipio]

It’s easy; remove one of the least realistic parts of D2:  instant repair!

At bases you will still be able to buy drones, shuttles, fighters (making carries worth their weight in gold, PFs will be handled differently), marines, mines, and spare parts to repair yourself in combat, but it won’t be the same.  Your “7th shield” won’t come back.   Hull, Excess Damage, Labs, Control Stations, ain’t reparable via the engineering panel.  Even if you have all of your weapons and power systems working a ship held together with chewing-gum and duct tape is going to start falling apart quickly once it starts taking damage.  CA ships and bigger are going to be rare so once they start taking serious damage from a few fights it will behoove an admiral to take that ship off the line.

So how does this balance out the 3-ship ubber-fleet?  CLs are going to be plentiful, these will make up of the ships in a fleet.  Suicide runs add up!  If you loose five D5 hulls to get a CCZ taken off the line it’s worth it!  Fighters, PFs, attrition units will be able to do the same.  I also think the first fleets to attack hexes will be CL/CW fleets as it just makes sense to start an invasion of a hex with the war cruisers.  Why risk damaging an expensive ship on the AI?

Questions?  Comment?  Demands that I take my meds?   

Damnit, that just might work!  Good thoughts there, DH.

-S'Cipio

[Lepton]

Insta-repair quite frankly is really silly.  When ships in the Trek/SFB universe get F’d up it takes months to fix, not just pressing a button.  Repair will no longer be available at starbases, since this isn’t possible it will be stopped by setting the prices for repair as prohibitively high.   This will be a turn-based campaign and real-repairs of a ship will require taking it off the frontline and it will need to spend some time in dry-dock and it will cost something in production points (to be determined . . .). 

We might need to be careful about the relative cost of ship production and ship repairs.  I might not be thinking clearly but if your ability to produce ships through EP outstrips your ability to repair ships through EP might not the RM just scrap ships instead of repairing them, or treat ships in general as attrition units?

So since it is turn-based I assume that ship repairs will take a turn to complete, yes?

[FPF-DieHard]

We might need to be careful about the relative cost of ship production and ship repairs.  I might not be thinking clearly but if your ability to produce ships through EP outstrips your ability to repair ships through EP might not the RM just scrap ships instead of repairing them, or treat ships in general as attrition units?

I'm thinking a flat-rate or 1/2 it's production cost rounded down.  Maybe less, will have to crunch the numbers.

So since it is turn-based I assume that ship repairs will take a turn to complete, yes?

Yes, so if  Gorn DNH is damaged badly in round 1, it gets repaired in round 2, it's back ready for action in round 3.

[Lepton]

The question is, do you want to make a server appealing to a very small group, or do you want to make a server for the entire community to try and keep interest in this game alive...?

If the majority of the the community wants to flip hexes, I honestly don't care anymore.   If I can get 3 players on each side for this, it's a go.

I'd rather poke my eye out with a rusty screw-driver than run/play on another hex-flipping server.  Having to fly 8-14 hours a day flipping hexes so my side doesn't get wiped off the map is a collasal waist of time and I will never do it again. 

Hey, I was so busy being an a-hole that I did not see this.  No more hex-flipping for you??  OH, HAPPY DAY!!  HAPPY DAY!!  I hate to say it but I am pretty much done with hex-munching servers as well.  And, yes, as far as I am concerned if we can get 6 folks to show up at one time that will be enough for me.  I'd rather play 3 good PvP matches in 3 hours than 18 ten minute AI missions.  Let's make it happen.

[Corbomite]

First premise, in ISC Invasion, the Disengagement rule will be applied to the SHIP, not the pilot.  We will have as full of an OOB as possible.  Get kicked out in a Sparrowhawk, come back in a Firehawk.

I fail to see the purpose of this if the ship was not damaged.

Get killed in a G-CM, have your race leader assign you another one and you can got back into the hex.  The Attrition will be of an empires shipyards, not it’s space.

Getting killed should definitely take you off the front for awhile as you have to be rescued, debriefed and reassigned.

Insta-repair quite frankly is really silly.  When ships in the Trek/SFB universe get F’d up it takes months to fix, not just pressing a button.  Repair will no longer be available at starbases, since this isn’t possible it will be stopped by setting the prices for repair as prohibitively high.   This will be a turn-based campaign and real-repairs of a ship will require taking it off the frontline and it will need to spend some time in dry-dock and it will cost something in production points (to be determined . . .). 

This sounds like an RM paperwork nightmare.

So how does this balance out the 3-ship ubber-fleet?  CLs are going to be plentiful, these will make up of the ships in a fleet.  Suicide runs add up!  If you loose five D5 hulls to get a CCZ taken off the line it’s worth it!  Fighters, PFs, attrition units will be able to do the same.  I also think the first fleets to attack hexes will be CL/CW fleets as it just makes sense to start an invasion of a hex with the war cruisers.  Why risk damaging an expensive ship on the AI?

I don't see how the ISC will have a chance in this type of environment if Carriers, PF Tenders and other specialty ships are not limited in deployment.

[FPF-DieHard]

I don't see how the ISC will have a chance in this type of environment if Carriers, PF Tenders and other specialty ships are not limited in deployment.

Specialty ships will be limited production, similar rules as F&E such as 1 mauler per production cycle, etc . . .  As far as fighter/PFs are concerned the ISC has them as well.   The ISC will also have a larger economy and probably a bigger starting pool of ships.  The GW races will have been economically ravaged by the War and just won't be able to produce as much. 

The devil is in the details which can be hammered out.   But I think the broad concept is solid.  We'll do a test round or two to work out the kinks.

[FPF-DieHard]

Insta-repair quite frankly is really silly.  When ships in the Trek/SFB universe get F’d up it takes months to fix, not just pressing a button.  Repair will no longer be available at starbases, since this isn’t possible it will be stopped by setting the prices for repair as prohibitively high.   This will be a turn-based campaign and real-repairs of a ship will require taking it off the frontline and it will need to spend some time in dry-dock and it will cost something in production points (to be determined . . .).

This sounds like an RM paperwork nightmare.

I don't think it will be that bad and since the server won't be up 24/7 the ships assignments can be done off-line.  People can setup Alt Accounts before hand so spare ships can be available on the fly.  Using the OCI and a Spreadsheet this should take about 10 minutes.  The RM/ARMs will be able to go into the OCI to assign different ships if new assignments are needed.

I talked to the Dnet big brains and though a fully-automated system is possible with SQL it will require time.   I'd rather not ask these guys to develop that as any spare time they have should be spent on SFC:4

[FPF-DieHard]

First premise, in ISC Invasion, the Disengagement rule will be applied to the SHIP, not the pilot.  We will have as full of an OOB as possible.  Get kicked out in a Sparrowhawk, come back in a Firehawk.

I fail to see the purpose of this if the ship was not damaged.

Get killed in a G-CM, have your race leader assign you another one and you can got back into the hex.  The Attrition will be of an empires shipyards, not it’s space.

Getting killed should definitely take you off the front for awhile as you have to be rescued, debriefed and reassigned.

This is all negotiable and the Disengagement rule may not ever be needed.  We're fighting over ships mainly, not territory.   Also if you kick everyone out of a hex, and with out low-player population it's very possible, you won't be able to get PvP.   The goal here is to get as much PvP as possible in a Strategic context, pretty hard for that to happen when you're opponents can't hit you back.

In F&E, to retreat you had to sacrifice some ships in a "screening" action.  Perhaps the only rule regarding this is in a 3v3, you cannot withdraw until one of your ships is dead? 

[Corbomite]

We're fighting over ships mainly, not territory.   

Really? I thought the whole purpose for the ISC on the server was to get territory. Now you say they are fighting over ships. So all the ISC has to do is conquer the shipyards of other races and they win?

[FPF-DieHard]

We're fighting over ships mainly, not territory.   

Really? I thought the whole purpose for the ISC on the server was to get territory. Now you say they are fighting over ships. So all the ISC has to do is conquer the shipyards of other races and they win?

Are you intentionally trying to be difficult?  That's Lepton's job 

Of course Territory will be involved, but since the ISC's territory cannot be attacked the way to stops it's War Machine is to kill it's ships attacking.  So yes, the ISC's goal will be conquest of space.   The GW Empire's goal will be to destroy enough ISC ships that they cannot do this.

Please don't try to trap me on semantics, this is basically a brain-dump of ideas and everything is written in chalk and honestly not that well thought out yet.

[Corbomite]

Well the way you have described it I doubt the ISC will take any significant gains.

[FPF-DieHard]

Well the way you have described it I doubt the ISC will take any significant gains.

With DVs of 2-3, they should be able to.

And even if they don't, so what?  The map is an excuse for carnage.

[Lepton]

Well the way you have described it I doubt the ISC will take any significant gains.

With DVs of 2-3, they should be able to.

And even if they don't, so what?  The map is an excuse for carnage.

Indeed, that's the idea.

[Corbomite]

Well the way you have described it I doubt the ISC will take any significant gains.

With DVs of 2-3, they should be able to.

And even if they don't, so what?  The map is an excuse for carnage.

Oh, I'm sorry. By your original post I assumed the map was and excuse for the ISC to take it. If they don't, they lose, that's what.