Topic: Reclamation: 2275 is here. (Read 10009 times)

Fluf · « **Reply #80 on:** April 23, 2003, 04:22:15 pm »

Nomad,

These are the settings I am using for LB3. They are pretty much consistant with the supplys the SFC2.net team has used from CW6 on. They seem to match up well with current mission packs. If I remember, they seem pretty close to what was used on Rooks Tavern III too.

[Cost/Ship/SupplyDock]
Repair      = 3.0
TradeIn      = 6.0
Missiles   = 2.5 //9.0
Fighters   = 3.0 //6.0
Shuttles   = 3.0 //12.0
Marines      = 4.0 //15.0
Mines      = 2.0 //18.0
SpareParts   = 4.0 //30.0

The problem is, with the new mission packs, consumables become a must. In order to keep casual players going, and progressing towards a bigger ship, especailly when they are flying in some of these missions, prices must be lowered to keep the "Fun Factor" in the game.

KBF-Dogmatix · « **Reply #81 on:** April 23, 2003, 05:05:38 pm »

Quote:

One of the things that makes OP wnderful is the moddabilty. The X-weapons, extra race slots, arpanded firing arcs, and all that make this game have much more potential for the future. In OP, we literaly could do and all eras mod starting the time of Enterprise and ending with the dominion war.

I'm really glad D2 in OP now aparantly works. The SFCX guys should adopt the SFC2.net ship and supplies prices if they want to improve their player base.

Bring on the Andros!!!

Who ARE you, you big mystery person, you!? (Damn..that's a lot of the word "you" in that sentence).

I agree on all accounts, eh? One of the things that always bugged me about EAW was the lack of Klingon boom-arcs. In OP we have them and that is good.

jdmckinney · « **Reply #83 on:** April 23, 2003, 06:02:34 pm »

Fluf, thanks for posting those settings.

The one big problem I have here is with cheap repair parts. With the current very strange limits on spares, a number of big ships can get through fights with smaller ships simply on the strength of their repair loadout and enough time. Moggy pointed this out to me as a problem he ran into a lot on a campaign.

So, to me there need to be some cost controls on spares so that a big ship that is constantly using up large numbers of spares to survive is going to eat up prestige along the lines of what they would have to pay for constant dock repairs and possibly some amount of additional maintenance that they're not spending on replacement ships. I would think 12 repairs should cost no more than half the normal mission success prestige, or 150. This would mean someone who spends about 25 repairs per mission is not going to make any prestige. That comes to about 12.5 PP per repair part. Is that unreasonable? Say we round it down to 10 -- then 30 parts is going to cost you a mission award.

On Reclamation, I have a DCWLP with 25 spare slots. If I use them all, which I've only done once so far, a 10 PP cost would end up taking 250 PP out of my winnings. Now, if I use that many parts, I probably also have a hefty repair and resupply bill. Still, if I'm taking missions with such rough opposition every time out, then I deserve to pay through the nose and sweat for my cash. Against the AI, if I'm finding missions too tough to afford the repair/resupply, then I should find players to coop with (of course, this means working around neutral coop in campaign design).

Here's what I want to know -- can players stomach this sort of cost once in a while? I mean, how often do you get such tough opposition that this would really come into play?

Maybe I'm just horribly out of touch with players' preferences, but doesn't anyone want to actually have to earn their ship upgrades? Promotions are there to allow you to get windfalls by making prestige on missions, even if you can't save it. Maybe we also need to request more prestige award variety from the mission scripters. Personally, I get a little tired of earning the same 300 prestige all the time. It would be nice if really tough, long (especially the long ones, since you can't run them as often) missions gave me an award commensurate with my effort. So, say 750 for assault missions where there are a lot of defenders and installations, or 400 for completing a Fleet Action or other 3v3 (or worse with fleets) mission, or 500 for destroying everything in a Courier Intercept. It's all a fine line, with settings, play time, and missions all being important variables.

I offer up these examples as fodder for coming up with some good numbers to use as guides. If these are too costly, then what's a better solution? I'm sure everyone has an opinion on this, so let's hear it.

jdmckinney · « **Reply #85 on:** April 23, 2003, 06:28:53 pm »

Ooops, yes, he uploaded a new one. It was after I left town, so I couldn't update it. The download URL is the same, so ...

NuclearWessels · « **Reply #87 on:** April 23, 2003, 06:47:48 pm »

Hmmm ... before you replace the mission pack on Reclamation ...

If you want to wait about 24 hours I should have the asteroid base defense/assault missions ready to throw back in the mix. I think they're ready, but want to do some more testing on them tomorrow to be sure.

dave

Fluf · « **Reply #88 on:** April 23, 2003, 07:13:03 pm »

Nomad, I agree, with the higher number of spare parts on ships now, and it can be a problem. However, what you have to watch for is hurting some of the drone races. By late era, and fast drones, a full load of drones can sometimes cost you 1/2 your prestige in just reloading, much less repairs and other supplies. Althugh since Dave has toned down the missions some from previous packs, this might not be as much of a problem as in the past. Scipios 4Powers Server started with spares at 50 apeice and we had partically "Evil" Dave missions. You ended up worring more about how many spares you could steal off of ships, rather than killing them. Even the stock Taldren setting of 30 is tough. Although the drone races do ok in early and even through mid, by late era, this high spare parts becomes a big factor, expecially for the Mirak and Klingons. So just keep this in mind when doing your settings.

Fluf · « **Reply #91 on:** April 23, 2003, 07:26:21 pm »

Interesting suggestion Cleaven. That might be a way to control things a little better.

CptCastrin · « **Reply #92 on:** April 23, 2003, 07:47:26 pm »

Not a bad idea, you could map out the break points and set it up so a quick line edit and reboot changes things. You could even use certain years (beyond the era breaks) as break points thus reflecting the initial cost of new tech then lowering the cost as the era progresses.

It's a manual fix but worthy of a try.

DONOTDELETE · « **Reply #93 on:** April 23, 2003, 09:07:42 pm »

To anyone who has read my comments in the referenced thread....

Dont misunderstand what I have said....

There is no need to throw out the baby with the bath water....Things are MUCH better than they once were...

But while we seek the ultimate gaming experience...we need to keep our eye on the goal...

FUN!

We must find a way to BOTH challenge the hardcore 8 hr player AND give meaningful gametime to the guys who drop in when they can...

In a perfect world...the game would become more difficult based on your glicko....

Or maybe....the higher the rank.....the more restrictions apply....not less...

I DO like custom missions...

I Do like a fair and balanced shiplist....

I do like winning a battle when odds where against me....

I dont like seeing the player base thinned.....

Somewhere between ridiculously easy and impossible is a happy medium....

IMHO...AOTK was "to date".....the closest to perfect server I have played....enough of a challenge to nutters....and the abilty of the casual player to aid the war effort....

Cleaven · « **Reply #94 on:** April 23, 2003, 09:23:58 pm »

Dropping the max number of spares available back to a reasonable number (even if it's the same for all hulls) would take a bit of pressure off the higher pricing of spares.

I must agree with the current price of the spares in so far as they do limit me to carrying 8 or so in a destroyer, and now that I have a CL I can afford to buy a few more to take into battle. So the logic behind the price is in fact correct in my opinion, but just not popular perhaps.

Dizzy · « **Reply #95 on:** April 23, 2003, 10:42:10 pm »

I'm not surprised of the resurfacing ill will between players for their love/hate of EAW and OP. I really think it is a cruel joke by Taldren and we are caught in the middle.

Anyways, I have to address Capt. Jeff. I dont think, Jeff, that anything I said warranted the response you gave me. Perhaps you missed an earlier post where I expressed my hope that SG3 would be able to work on OP. I talked with Castrin at length about it before making my decision. Jeff, I dont think you know the bottomless pit of despair I fell into when I found I couldnt use OP.

Luckily, I climbed out b4 it was flushed...

There are 2 primary reasons that SG3 didnt show up on OP's radar. First, after the recent OP GSA patch, it still left D2 unaddressed and in tatters, remember, there is still supposed to be another D2 patch... Second, the subsequent testing of the D2 that followed by the sfcx team revealed horrors far beyond the problems I dealt with on the original SG.

So with as much work as I had left to do on SG3, which btw, Karnak, has taken DAYS instead of hours, forced me to pick a platform that gave me far fewer options than I had hoped to have, Jeff...

At this point of developement... I could push SG3 back, and let Karnak use the SG3 missions, shiplist and ideas to further infuse his already stellar ISC Invasion server and take SG3 to OP. I would need the complete and total support of every single SFCX member in order to do it, and it would launch, OP willing, after ISC Invasion ends.

That is a big IF. Some of the SFCX members dont like me and that feeling is mutual. Obstacle #2 would be to get a solid effort on every level of OP from every OP player and admin to work to clean up the mess Taldren left us with. Third prob. would be getting it to a level where the leftover unfixable OP D2 problems wouldnt severely interfere with a campaign.

So... I'm really neutral on this. I'd prefer to use OP... I mean who wouldn't?

But Jeff, lets layoff the smack talk... Have I ever told you to stfu?

Capt Jeff · « **Reply #96 on:** April 24, 2003, 05:54:47 am »

Dizzy,

After all the SFTU's dished out by you over the years (yes, including one or two directed at me), I am touched that you are upset that I threw one back at you. Who knew you cared???

Dizzy....I want SG3 to succeed, no matter what platform it operates on. I want all servers to succeed because they are what keeps this going....if there is to be only one server running at a time, it needs to be good enough to keep everyone interested. So, I hope for the best for you, and understand the difficulties of putting together a grand campaign.

so, can we all be friends??

News:

Topic: Reclamation: 2275 is here. (Read 10009 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Fluf

KBF-Dogmatix

DiggityDank

jdmckinney

CptCastrin

jdmckinney

Cleaven

NuclearWessels

Fluf

CptCastrin

Cleaven

Fluf

CptCastrin

**DONOTDELETE**

Cleaven

Dizzy

Capt Jeff

KOTH-Steel Claw

Mog

KOTH-Steel Claw

Topic: Reclamation: 2275 is here. (Read 10009 times)

DONOTDELETE