XDemonX's Map

XDemonX
Newbie Spam Artist
Posts: 657
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 4:28 am
Location: Highland
Contact:

XDemonX's Map

Post by XDemonX »

Image
http://postimg.org/image/uss7vxyyv/

Racials:
Two Racial Galaxies. Split up to have 4 races in each gal. Alskant/Creo/Human/Ik in one, Nij/Salv/WQ/Thev in the other. More strategy will have to be used when arming if dying at a op. Also makes it harder for a team to play from fed.

PGal:
Two planets in each galaxy. They're smaller with random walls. This is for a alliance to take over two small planet galaxies. Will make more strategy for attacking and defending.

Neutral:
Can be similar setup to how emerald is. (of course smaller) if people like that setup.

**New Possible Coding Changes:
Fed Penalty - When in fed, turn speed is decreased by 20%. This is to prevent people from just sitting in fed all game doing their own thing. Although it is possible for them to still do that, it will just be much harder to be #1 in experience or #1 in kills playing from fed all game. SMR is a alliance based game. You should be rewarded for having a planet galaxy and using it. This may sway some players who usually like to do their own thing to try playing with a team.


I need some more input especially from Jouldax, i am not good at pounding out all the details just want to give Jouldax something to work with. Please provide feedback, even if negative. I want this round to be fun for everyone!
This is a beat, you just can't touch.....
Image
jouldax
Newbie Spam Artist
Posts: 582
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:38 pm

Re: XDemonX's Map

Post by jouldax »

Initial thoughts, some of which you and I discussed on IRC:

1. I'm still not sure about the racial separation strategy. In a draft game, there are typically 2 teams, and no one plays from fed. While a team should always have more than enough to PB, I don't know how much you want to slow down ops by increasing arming turns and making a player travel all over for weapons. It would make more sense in a traditional round, I think, but could be interesting here. Just something to consider.

2. I like the separate gal ideas, so you could have a chess match type of ending. I might increase the number of planets to 3 in each galaxy if we're only raising the planet levels back up to 53 (full drones but keep gens low at like 10 or so).

3. Routes will be tricky with 2 racials, 2 neutrals and limited sectioned-off areas. Will there be ports in the pgals at least for construction purposes? Will alliances be able to build super-routes? How will PRing factor into this game, if at all? Remember, you need cash to op and sustain losses, so there needs to be a robust trading system. How many sectors are you thinking for each galaxy?

4. I don't think the coding change is necessary for this game, although it's something I'd like to see implemented eventually, given my comments that most people in draft game land armed.

5. What about mine expiration times by galaxy? How long should forces last?

I will come back with more deeper-detailed thoughts when I have more time later.
JettJackson
Fledgling Spam Artist
Posts: 3572
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:38 am
Location: Eastpointe MI

Re: XDemonX's Map

Post by JettJackson »

I think putting all the racials together in one galaxy would be best, that way it limits the fed locations. I also think 3 planets is much better than 2. 2 is just so limiting. Mine expiration should be as follows, 1 day for a 50 in racials, 3 days for neutral and 4 or 5 days for planet gal. This will limit mining of racials, and limit mine fields in neutrals.
Lead: Sesame Street, Rogue Squad

Co-Lead: Suckas, Black Sun Ascending, Wraith Squadron, Fool's Errend, Team Poker, The Phantom Order, Toxic #5

Member of: Team Pup and Suds, Nintendo Power, System Failure, Crusaders, new dawn, Cereal Killers, Armory, Armory V2, _-=`Perfection`=-_, The Guild, Ragnarok, Heimdall, United Rebels, ilLegitimate Basterds

I've seen and done it all
XDemonX
Newbie Spam Artist
Posts: 657
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 4:28 am
Location: Highland
Contact:

Re: XDemonX's Map

Post by XDemonX »

JettJackson wrote:I think putting all the racials together in one galaxy would be best, that way it limits the fed locations. I also think 3 planets is much better than 2. 2 is just so limiting. Mine expiration should be as follows, 1 day for a 50 in racials, 3 days for neutral and 4 or 5 days for planet gal. This will limit mining of racials, and limit mine fields in neutrals.
I like the mining and planet idea. Jouldax suggested something similar to have 3 planets in each as well.

The races are split up to put shield heavy weapons on one side and armor heavy weapons on the other side.

If you put all the racials in one gal, that makes arming way too easy. We want to stray people away from even considering playing from fed. There is a lot of good players who choose to play from fed without a team. Maybe we can sway them to try to use a team.

The other suggestion i wanted to ask is how are people liking the 3v3 combat? Personally I hate it. I think it should go back to normal and its just fleet vs fleet.
This is a beat, you just can't touch.....
Image
Holti
Quiet One
Posts: 399
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 3:30 pm

Re: XDemonX's Map

Post by Holti »

The other suggestion i wanted to ask is how are people liking the 3v3 combat? Personally I hate it. I think it should go back to normal and its just fleet vs fleet.
A number of players have mentioned to me that they miss fleet fights. If we changed it for this round, I'd announce it on facebook to spark interest in the less active players who say they miss fleet fights. My only concern is that we would have hunting packs again, which prompted the change in the first place.
JettJackson
Fledgling Spam Artist
Posts: 3572
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:38 am
Location: Eastpointe MI

Re: XDemonX's Map

Post by JettJackson »

Personally I like the 3v3, if there is 2 fleets they will fight either way. Originally I didn't like the change but the more I have played it the more I like it.
Lead: Sesame Street, Rogue Squad

Co-Lead: Suckas, Black Sun Ascending, Wraith Squadron, Fool's Errend, Team Poker, The Phantom Order, Toxic #5

Member of: Team Pup and Suds, Nintendo Power, System Failure, Crusaders, new dawn, Cereal Killers, Armory, Armory V2, _-=`Perfection`=-_, The Guild, Ragnarok, Heimdall, United Rebels, ilLegitimate Basterds

I've seen and done it all
JettJackson
Fledgling Spam Artist
Posts: 3572
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:38 am
Location: Eastpointe MI

Re: XDemonX's Map

Post by JettJackson »

XDemonX wrote:
JettJackson wrote:I think putting all the racials together in one galaxy would be best, that way it limits the fed locations. I also think 3 planets is much better than 2. 2 is just so limiting. Mine expiration should be as follows, 1 day for a 50 in racials, 3 days for neutral and 4 or 5 days for planet gal. This will limit mining of racials, and limit mine fields in neutrals.
I like the mining and planet idea. Jouldax suggested something similar to have 3 planets in each as well.

The races are split up to put shield heavy weapons on one side and armor heavy weapons on the other side.

If you put all the racials in one gal, that makes arming way too easy. We want to stray people away from even considering playing from fed. There is a lot of good players who choose to play from fed without a team. Maybe we can sway them to try to use a team.

The other suggestion i wanted to ask is how are people liking the 3v3 combat? Personally I hate it. I think it should go back to normal and its just fleet vs fleet.
Putting the racials together doesn't require having the weapons together, that can go either way.
Lead: Sesame Street, Rogue Squad

Co-Lead: Suckas, Black Sun Ascending, Wraith Squadron, Fool's Errend, Team Poker, The Phantom Order, Toxic #5

Member of: Team Pup and Suds, Nintendo Power, System Failure, Crusaders, new dawn, Cereal Killers, Armory, Armory V2, _-=`Perfection`=-_, The Guild, Ragnarok, Heimdall, United Rebels, ilLegitimate Basterds

I've seen and done it all
XDemonX
Newbie Spam Artist
Posts: 657
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 4:28 am
Location: Highland
Contact:

Re: XDemonX's Map

Post by XDemonX »

JettJackson wrote:Personally I like the 3v3, if there is 2 fleets they will fight either way. Originally I didn't like the change but the more I have played it the more I like it.
Can you give some reasons why you like the 3v3?

I do not like 3v3 because it isn't fun in fleet fights. For example, usually in fleet fights it is beneficial to be the one attacking, in 3v3 fleet fights it is not always the case. The example being Bouncer and I fire faster than most people and we get a ton of triggers off in fleet fight that means him and I are going to die first because we are in on most the shots. Also the fact it is random too messes things up and sometimes gives the smaller fleet a advantage. If you need a example of that remember last game we when we died 4v3 and we had no idea how?

Also for me fleet fights are so exciting, who doesn't love getting a trigger off in a 10v10 and seeing those huge shots and then looking at the big shots after. It makes the game exciting. Most of my fun times in SMR involves large fleet fights. Not fleet fights where people are shooting 3v3 and the people surviving are the ones not even firing but just sitting and watching.
This is a beat, you just can't touch.....
Image
jouldax
Newbie Spam Artist
Posts: 582
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:38 pm

Re: XDemonX's Map

Post by jouldax »

I think this should be moved to a separate discussion, but I've personally been enjoying the 3v3 combat code very much. I like being able to hop into a sector with 10 of you and have a chance to escape even if you get 1 trigger. I also like the fact that it rewards the more active fleet with more triggers, allows for more tactics during the battle (more chances to run along with the option to focus on certain targets), and removes some of the randomness associated with the old fleet battles.

If it was 10 on 10 before, whoever fired first had the major advantage because their whole fleet would fire and usually kill one ship, putting the balance immediately in their favor. 10v10 is also just a combination of luck and exp since both fleets will probably have 1 or 2 fast triggers. It was amusing for half a second and then it was over. I'd never want to go back to that style.

The only really valid point I think you made was about faster triggers dying sooner. I'd be ok with changing the code so that return fire is completely random (shouldn't be that hard). Frankly, I wanted to do away with return fire, but that would put newer/slower players at a serious disadvantage, and we don't have the player base to support that kind of game yet.
JettJackson
Fledgling Spam Artist
Posts: 3572
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:38 am
Location: Eastpointe MI

Re: XDemonX's Map

Post by JettJackson »

XDemonX wrote:
JettJackson wrote:Personally I like the 3v3, if there is 2 fleets they will fight either way. Originally I didn't like the change but the more I have played it the more I like it.
Can you give some reasons why you like the 3v3?

I do not like 3v3 because it isn't fun in fleet fights. For example, usually in fleet fights it is beneficial to be the one attacking, in 3v3 fleet fights it is not always the case. The example being Bouncer and I fire faster than most people and we get a ton of triggers off in fleet fight that means him and I are going to die first because we are in on most the shots. Also the fact it is random too messes things up and sometimes gives the smaller fleet a advantage. If you need a example of that remember last game we when we died 4v3 and we had no idea how?

Also for me fleet fights are so exciting, who doesn't love getting a trigger off in a 10v10 and seeing those huge shots and then looking at the big shots after. It makes the game exciting. Most of my fun times in SMR involves large fleet fights. Not fleet fights where people are shooting 3v3 and the people surviving are the ones not even firing but just sitting and watching.
I think you answered this one yourself, it actually devotes skill to the game now, you cant just go into a fleet fight and blindly fire based upon the numbers. You and I know I am just as fast but I am not going into the fleeter thinking i need to fire at 100mph.
Lead: Sesame Street, Rogue Squad

Co-Lead: Suckas, Black Sun Ascending, Wraith Squadron, Fool's Errend, Team Poker, The Phantom Order, Toxic #5

Member of: Team Pup and Suds, Nintendo Power, System Failure, Crusaders, new dawn, Cereal Killers, Armory, Armory V2, _-=`Perfection`=-_, The Guild, Ragnarok, Heimdall, United Rebels, ilLegitimate Basterds

I've seen and done it all
Post Reply