Admin Table - September 12

Discussions about everything, SMR related or not.
XDemonX
Newbie Spam Artist
Posts: 657
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 4:28 am
Location: Highland
Contact:

Re: Admin Table - September 12

Post by XDemonX »

Can't read the first link. Must be admin only discussion.

I really hope the only discussion for the change is the quick suggestion by N.ator that was not really discussed at all.

JJ the point I am making is I don't think any race is too crazy powerful. I don't agree with the skant changes. They should have the best traders since they can't op. Have you ever opped in a TM? it is pretty pathetic. The point I was making is that any race can seem over powered depending on the people who choose to play it. Every race should be powerful in it's own special way. I just dislike nerfs on things that are based off a few players who play it pretty well. (Example is I believe DC was initially nerfed because of Orca/Serg). Same can be said with losing cloak while dropping mines.

I guess I am a little old school. I use to believe experience was important and cloak was something fun in the game. When you led an alliance, it was extremely important to have one player that could cloak over everyone and if you were the other alliance that didn't have the person with high exp then you were like "oh crap we are in trouble". Again, just adds more strategy to the game. A lot of times you would protect that person from getting podded because you wanted that advantage and the other team would try extra hard to pod them. Now, exp is only really a big deal in 1v1 so if you have half a brain you know not to 1v1 someone with 5x experience than you.
This is a beat, you just can't touch.....
Image
Grey Death
Admin Emeritus
Posts: 441
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2002 11:01 pm

Re: Admin Table - September 12

Post by Grey Death »

XDemonX wrote:The point I was making is that any race can seem over powered depending on the people who choose to play it. Every race should be powerful in it's own special way. I just dislike nerfs on things that are based off a few players who play it pretty well. (Example is I believe DC was initially nerfed because of Orca/Serg). Same can be said with losing cloak while dropping mines.

I guess I am a little old school. I use to believe experience was important and cloak was something fun in the game. When you led an alliance, it was extremely important to have one player that could cloak over everyone and if you were the other alliance that didn't have the person with high exp then you were like "oh crap we are in trouble". Again, just adds more strategy to the game. A lot of times you would protect that person from getting podded because you wanted that advantage and the other team would try extra hard to pod them. Now, exp is only really a big deal in 1v1 so if you have half a brain you know not to 1v1 someone with 5x experience than you.
I completely agree with you on this one xDx. I would recommend focusing more on balancing using strengths as opposed to nerfing. The more the races are nerfed for balancing the more the individuality of each race is diminished. Each race should have distinct advantages and disadvantages. A good example is the three way balance of Starcraft while keeping each race distinct, hardware distinct and can be OP based on the player but as long as opponent knows how to counter then balance is preserved.
Grey Death
Leader TLS and former War leader KAOS
-A conquered people should know when the are conquered!
Anonymous Roman General
Incognito
Quiet One
Posts: 397
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 11:59 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Admin Table - September 12

Post by Incognito »

Grey Death wrote:
XDemonX wrote:The point I was making is that any race can seem over powered depending on the people who choose to play it. Every race should be powerful in it's own special way. I just dislike nerfs on things that are based off a few players who play it pretty well. (Example is I believe DC was initially nerfed because of Orca/Serg). Same can be said with losing cloak while dropping mines.

I guess I am a little old school. I use to believe experience was important and cloak was something fun in the game. When you led an alliance, it was extremely important to have one player that could cloak over everyone and if you were the other alliance that didn't have the person with high exp then you were like "oh crap we are in trouble". Again, just adds more strategy to the game. A lot of times you would protect that person from getting podded because you wanted that advantage and the other team would try extra hard to pod them. Now, exp is only really a big deal in 1v1 so if you have half a brain you know not to 1v1 someone with 5x experience than you.
I completely agree with you on this one xDx. I would recommend focusing more on balancing using strengths as opposed to nerfing. The more the races are nerfed for balancing the more the individuality of each race is diminished. Each race should have distinct advantages and disadvantages. A good example is the three way balance of Starcraft while keeping each race distinct, hardware distinct and can be OP based on the player but as long as opponent knows how to counter then balance is preserved.
Right now, we aren't discussing nerfing the cloak. In fact, we are buffing it by removing the turn penalty.
I+N+C+O+G+N+I+T+O=Not you

I took a calculated risk. Unfortunately, I am bad at math.
XDemonX
Newbie Spam Artist
Posts: 657
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 4:28 am
Location: Highland
Contact:

Re: Admin Table - September 12

Post by XDemonX »

Incognito wrote:
Grey Death wrote:
XDemonX wrote:The point I was making is that any race can seem over powered depending on the people who choose to play it. Every race should be powerful in it's own special way. I just dislike nerfs on things that are based off a few players who play it pretty well. (Example is I believe DC was initially nerfed because of Orca/Serg). Same can be said with losing cloak while dropping mines.

I guess I am a little old school. I use to believe experience was important and cloak was something fun in the game. When you led an alliance, it was extremely important to have one player that could cloak over everyone and if you were the other alliance that didn't have the person with high exp then you were like "oh crap we are in trouble". Again, just adds more strategy to the game. A lot of times you would protect that person from getting podded because you wanted that advantage and the other team would try extra hard to pod them. Now, exp is only really a big deal in 1v1 so if you have half a brain you know not to 1v1 someone with 5x experience than you.
I completely agree with you on this one xDx. I would recommend focusing more on balancing using strengths as opposed to nerfing. The more the races are nerfed for balancing the more the individuality of each race is diminished. Each race should have distinct advantages and disadvantages. A good example is the three way balance of Starcraft while keeping each race distinct, hardware distinct and can be OP based on the player but as long as opponent knows how to counter then balance is preserved.
Right now, we aren't discussing nerfing the cloak. In fact, we are buffing it by removing the turn penalty.
Turn penalty wasn't that huge of a deal. Actually made you fly a little bit more carefully. Would have been nice to keep turn penalty when you lose your cloak from firing/hitting mines and not have a turn penalty for recloaking after dropping forces. That was only annoying part.

If I had a choice, i'd prefer to keep the turn penalty and move back towards levels than raw exp.
This is a beat, you just can't touch.....
Image
JettJackson
Fledgling Spam Artist
Posts: 3572
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:38 am
Location: Eastpointe MI

Re: Admin Table - September 12

Post by JettJackson »

XDemonX wrote:Can't read the first link. Must be admin only discussion.

I really hope the only discussion for the change is the quick suggestion by N.ator that was not really discussed at all.

JJ the point I am making is I don't think any race is too crazy powerful. I don't agree with the skant changes. They should have the best traders since they can't op. Have you ever opped in a TM? it is pretty pathetic. The point I was making is that any race can seem over powered depending on the people who choose to play it. Every race should be powerful in it's own special way. I just dislike nerfs on things that are based off a few players who play it pretty well. (Example is I believe DC was initially nerfed because of Orca/Serg). Same can be said with losing cloak while dropping mines.

I guess I am a little old school. I use to believe experience was important and cloak was something fun in the game. When you led an alliance, it was extremely important to have one player that could cloak over everyone and if you were the other alliance that didn't have the person with high exp then you were like "oh crap we are in trouble". Again, just adds more strategy to the game. A lot of times you would protect that person from getting podded because you wanted that advantage and the other team would try extra hard to pod them. Now, exp is only really a big deal in 1v1 so if you have half a brain you know not to 1v1 someone with 5x experience than you.
I created a new link to the first link so you can view the thread.

http://smrcnn.smrealms.de/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=11987

As for the Alskant race changes, they are still the best traders, I did not touch their trade capabilities. I did however suggest their size be reduced closer to neutral traders but still above them. They are trade ships, they don't need to be /9 to /11. The only ship I suggested changing their trade capability for Alskant was the ATM, making the ship still capable of trading but at more of a utility standpoint. Honestly I would be fine in compensating an extra tph or 2 to allow it a better utility role. No I haven't opped in an ATM but I have played with those who have, it isn't an incapable ship like you suggest.
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: Admin Table - September 12

Post by JettJackson »

Incognito wrote: Right now, we aren't discussing nerfing the cloak. In fact, we are buffing it by removing the turn penalty.
Yeah I am not sure where this nerfing discussion is coming from either, we are helping WQ out by removing a needless turn usage.
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: Admin Table - September 12

Post by XDemonX »

JettJackson wrote:
XDemonX wrote:Can't read the first link. Must be admin only discussion.

I really hope the only discussion for the change is the quick suggestion by N.ator that was not really discussed at all.

JJ the point I am making is I don't think any race is too crazy powerful. I don't agree with the skant changes. They should have the best traders since they can't op. Have you ever opped in a TM? it is pretty pathetic. The point I was making is that any race can seem over powered depending on the people who choose to play it. Every race should be powerful in it's own special way. I just dislike nerfs on things that are based off a few players who play it pretty well. (Example is I believe DC was initially nerfed because of Orca/Serg). Same can be said with losing cloak while dropping mines.

I guess I am a little old school. I use to believe experience was important and cloak was something fun in the game. When you led an alliance, it was extremely important to have one player that could cloak over everyone and if you were the other alliance that didn't have the person with high exp then you were like "oh crap we are in trouble". Again, just adds more strategy to the game. A lot of times you would protect that person from getting podded because you wanted that advantage and the other team would try extra hard to pod them. Now, exp is only really a big deal in 1v1 so if you have half a brain you know not to 1v1 someone with 5x experience than you.
I created a new link to the first link so you can view the thread.

http://smrcnn.smrealms.de/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=11987

As for the Alskant race changes, they are still the best traders, I did not touch their trade capabilities. I did however suggest their size be reduced closer to neutral traders but still above them. They are trade ships, they don't need to be /9 to /11. The only ship I suggested changing their trade capability for Alskant was the ATM, making the ship still capable of trading but at more of a utility standpoint. Honestly I would be fine in compensating an extra tph or 2 to allow it a better utility role. No I haven't opped in an ATM but I have played with those who have, it isn't an incapable ship like you suggest.
I completely agree their defense needs to be reduced. You're right. No reason for them to have the best trade potential and be an absolute tank.

For that thread.. that just talks about an issue that has already been fixed, which is losing cloak while dropping mines(which I agree with). None of these threads are complaining that people are "unseeable". Where was the discussion with changing from level to exp? Still all I see is the quick suggestion from N.ator that no one discussed.
This is a beat, you just can't touch.....
Image
JettJackson
Fledgling Spam Artist
Posts: 3572
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:38 am
Location: Eastpointe MI

Re: Admin Table - September 12

Post by JettJackson »

XDemonX wrote:
JettJackson wrote:
XDemonX wrote:Can't read the first link. Must be admin only discussion.

I really hope the only discussion for the change is the quick suggestion by N.ator that was not really discussed at all.

JJ the point I am making is I don't think any race is too crazy powerful. I don't agree with the skant changes. They should have the best traders since they can't op. Have you ever opped in a TM? it is pretty pathetic. The point I was making is that any race can seem over powered depending on the people who choose to play it. Every race should be powerful in it's own special way. I just dislike nerfs on things that are based off a few players who play it pretty well. (Example is I believe DC was initially nerfed because of Orca/Serg). Same can be said with losing cloak while dropping mines.

I guess I am a little old school. I use to believe experience was important and cloak was something fun in the game. When you led an alliance, it was extremely important to have one player that could cloak over everyone and if you were the other alliance that didn't have the person with high exp then you were like "oh crap we are in trouble". Again, just adds more strategy to the game. A lot of times you would protect that person from getting podded because you wanted that advantage and the other team would try extra hard to pod them. Now, exp is only really a big deal in 1v1 so if you have half a brain you know not to 1v1 someone with 5x experience than you.
I created a new link to the first link so you can view the thread.

http://smrcnn.smrealms.de/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=11987

As for the Alskant race changes, they are still the best traders, I did not touch their trade capabilities. I did however suggest their size be reduced closer to neutral traders but still above them. They are trade ships, they don't need to be /9 to /11. The only ship I suggested changing their trade capability for Alskant was the ATM, making the ship still capable of trading but at more of a utility standpoint. Honestly I would be fine in compensating an extra tph or 2 to allow it a better utility role. No I haven't opped in an ATM but I have played with those who have, it isn't an incapable ship like you suggest.
I completely agree their defense needs to be reduced. You're right. No reason for them to have the best trade potential and be an absolute tank.

For that thread.. that just talks about an issue that has already been fixed, which is losing cloak while dropping mines(which I agree with). None of these threads are complaining that people are "unseeable". Where was the discussion with changing from level to exp? Still all I see is the quick suggestion from N.ator that no one discussed.
I don't know if there was a formal discussion about it beyond stuff in the admin rooms while page was changing stuff. The only thing I remember was most were in favor of the change when it was introduced.
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: Admin Table - September 12

Post by XDemonX »

For future decisions.. I think it should be a good practice to have discussions like this which can be looked at to see why decisions were made. There is no reason to have secret admin discussions with only a couple admins. Any game changing that effects the players should be discussed openly. It does no harm discussing these things in the open like this. If they are discussed in IRC then the 10 seconds should be spent to copy and paste the logs into forums for other players who were not there to give input, like admin tables. The only thing that should be discussed in your secret forums/room are current bans. I really think this topic was not discussed enough and it was just something that was slid in there. Which I think happens quite often with a lot of changes that the game gets stuck with for a while. Assuming you guys did discuss it, then GreyDeath would have been involved in these discussions and maybe certain points were not raised because he seems to be leaning towards the level system for cloak.

You have to remember.. ideas are not the rare resource here. There are MANY great ideas out there. The rare resource is coding. Which is why we should take the time to discuss everything that gets pushed through to be coded.
This is a beat, you just can't touch.....
Image
Incognito
Quiet One
Posts: 397
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 11:59 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Admin Table - September 12

Post by Incognito »

Just remembered, it was a RaF. You can still find it under the Implemented Features ingame. The vote was 2 favorites, 17 for, 8 against. So this wasn't a closed-room decision.
I+N+C+O+G+N+I+T+O=Not you

I took a calculated risk. Unfortunately, I am bad at math.
Post Reply