Discouraging tit for tat planet turnovers and opign from fed

Discussions about everything, SMR related or not.
Post Reply
Astax
SMR Coder
Posts: 317
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2002 9:55 pm

Discouraging tit for tat planet turnovers and opign from fed

Post by Astax »

This is becoming an alarming trend, OPing out of fed back and forth until one side owns all the planets and the other side none. How to address this?

Looking on insight into why this is happening:
What map factors tend to lead to this behavior. (probably distance from UNO for one)
What can/shoud be done about this. (If anything)
How to make OPing more fun, so that it doesn't boil down to which side does not get burned out.

Some incentive I would like to work on:
Incentive to building planet as opposed to capturing it.
Incentive to retake planet ASAP vs at next OP.
Incentive to park on planet vs FED.

I have some ideas I will share later.
seldum
Beta Tester
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: Discouraging tit for tat planet turnovers and opign from

Post by seldum »

First off a reversion to old pvp combat of 10 vs 10. The current 3v3 clearly has not brought about the effects that were desired (smaller forces taking on larger ones was the main point). I was instrumental to the reduction but I was pushing for purely solo combat a compromise was made and we tried 2v2 for 1 game before raising it to 3. The concept might have faired a bit better as 1v1 but it still would have crippled the effectiveness of fleet parking. Clearly people have no desire to engage a superior force with an active defense so we might as well restore the passive.

Remove fed protections, add something like space stations ships can dock at land on that would be able to be attacked. These would be racially specific and would function much the same as fed protection but with the limitation being you cant dock at all if you are not that race | dont have peace with that race | or have too high of an attack rating. Attack rating determination should consider only the players relations both global and personal with the given race. Why would the leaders of the WQ Human government really care if Bob the pirate was out trading drugs and blowing up tradeships as long as they were of a different species which may or may not be at war with them. Bob the pirate would probably be considered a hero to the West Quadrant people and be allowed to pretty much do whatever he wanted i.e. land with a lvl 5 weapon.

The space station would be pretty tough to bust equivalent to a max level planet. It would not be stockable with defenses the way planets are meaning that it is mostly safe in the early game but later on it is much more prudent to have your own planets built up so you can actually defend them. This would obviously hurt solo players a good bit but would just have to evoke some strategy whereas if you notice a large number of 1 alliance is parking on the same spacestation as you it might be a good idea to find a different spot and after all the game is not really catered to solo play. Italic players would be protected regardless in that sector unless they had a high enough attack rating to count as a kill stat.

Also to be considered would be adding extra benefits for planet parking. Will discuss further.
Image
jouldax
Newbie Spam Artist
Posts: 582
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:38 pm

Re: Discouraging tit for tat planet turnovers and opign from

Post by jouldax »

Planet benefits are a good idea. Removing fed would severely hurt noobs. Moving fed further from planets would discourage fed opping, but would also cost you more if you get podded during an op. I have several more thoughts on this topic but I need to sleep first.
JettJackson
Fledgling Spam Artist
Posts: 3572
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:38 am
Location: Eastpointe MI

Re: Discouraging tit for tat planet turnovers and opign from

Post by JettJackson »

There aren't many benefits to landing on planets right now if you can't have a fleet fight return, at this point the combat code only benefits the attacking team. Removing Fed would not help the game at all especially since fed is needed for smaller teams/solo players and everyone at the beginning of the game.
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
seldum
Beta Tester
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: Discouraging tit for tat planet turnovers and opign from

Post by seldum »

As for harming new players I said it would work the same they would be protected no matter what if they dont have guns.
Image
JettJackson
Fledgling Spam Artist
Posts: 3572
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:38 am
Location: Eastpointe MI

Re: Discouraging tit for tat planet turnovers and opign from

Post by JettJackson »

seldum wrote:As for harming new players I said it would work the same they would be protected no matter what if they dont have guns.
Having new players be unkillable while trading is a bad idea as well as they wouldn't learn the game properly.
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
seldum
Beta Tester
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: Discouraging tit for tat planet turnovers and opign from

Post by seldum »

I meant on the space station thing not while they are trading
Image
Freon22
Beginner Spam Artist
Posts: 3278
Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2002 10:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Discouraging tit for tat planet turnovers and opign from

Post by Freon22 »

Astax wrote:This is becoming an alarming trend, OPing out of fed back and forth until one side owns all the planets and the other side none. How to address this?

Looking on insight into why this is happening:
What map factors tend to lead to this behavior. (probably distance from UNO for one)
What can/shoud be done about this. (If anything)
How to make OPing more fun, so that it doesn't boil down to which side does not get burned out.

Some incentive I would like to work on:
Incentive to building planet as opposed to capturing it.
Incentive to retake planet ASAP vs at next OP.
Incentive to park on planet vs FED.

I have some ideas I will share later.
Hi all :) I have been away for a while working on other things.
What map factors tend to lead to this behavior. (probably distance from UNO for one)
I think it is more (planet galaxy distance to fed). I don't think poding players in fed is the answer. I am just saying think carefully before you do some type of space station thing. Maybe it would be better to make turns generate slower in fed then on planets. Just an idea it may not be right just throwing it out there.

How to make OPing more fun, so that it doesn't boil down to which side does not get burned out.
I don't think its so much of which side gets burned out. I think it is more of how it works, everyone always parks on the same planet. So unless you know what planet they are on you are wasting money, turns, and time guessing. Then there is the Yes we know what planet they park on! But there is 25 of them parked and we can only get 12 player to Op. Now we wasting money, turns, and time to give them a free launch off of their planet. We can not get the cream per say because there are two of them online so we are out gunned. Maybe make it so that planets do not auto launch players, then they will park on more then one planet to cut their losses. Just an idea may not be right just throwing it out there.

Incentive to build and retake planets
Anything money, turns, weapons, ships, relation anything to make it better to build, own, and retake your planets.

Nice to see some of you guys take care and have fun.
XDemonX
Newbie Spam Artist
Posts: 657
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 4:28 am
Location: Highland
Contact:

Re: Discouraging tit for tat planet turnovers and opign from

Post by XDemonX »

Hey friends!

I didn't have time to read through your most likely insightful posts but here are some ideas to help.

Bonus for landing on planet
This will promote everyone to land on planets. Example of a bonus could be 10-20% increase

penalty for landing in fed dependent on ship size
Very simple, if you are trying to park in fed in a top racial it will cost ya. Not sure how to scale this but this will make people think twice about parking in fed. This also protects newbie players and will make more and more people want to get out of fed.


Make arming paths longer.

Maybe implement a code that gives a player the option to salvage weapons. Price for level 5 weapon, level 4, level 3, level 2, ect. This will make it a lot better for people who die to planets to rearm and give alliances more reason to hoard monies

Done and done.
This is a beat, you just can't touch.....
Image
Post Reply