Welcome aboard Visitor...

Daily Screenshot

Server Costs Target


Target met!

Latest Topics

- Holly Cow Its alive!! »
- How did Darkspace loose it's customers? »
- "GCQL MFC stopped working" when launching the app »
- Re: Ich verabschiede mich »
- Things Dark Space needs to Address »
- other games ? »
- Random Lobby Quotes »
- Credits »
- When to play? »
- A few years ago »

Development Blog

- State of DarkSpace Development »
- Potential planetary interdictor changes! »
- The Silent Cartographer »
- Cloaking update... »
- Tools for tips »
- Fleet levels and more! »
- Game Mechanics Question and Answer Thread »
- Under Construction »
- Ship Tiers and You »
- Give Credits feature now live! »

Combat Kills

Combat kills in last 24 hours:
Kills chart
Killboard

Upcoming Events

- Weekly DarkSpace
10/26/17 +4.8 Days
- Towel Day
05/25/18 +215.1 Days
- International Talk like a Pirate Day!
09/19/18 +332.1 Days

Search

 

Anniversaries

No anniversaries today.

Facebook & Twitter

Why not follow us on Twitter or Facebook for more information and fan updates?

[FAQ
Forum Index » » English (General) » » How did Darkspace loose it's customers?
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 Next Page )
 Author How did Darkspace loose it's customers?
Guyton (Angel of Death)
Marshal

Joined: January 25, 2004
Posts: 699
Posted: 2017-06-19 13:31   
What about bringing back the Scenario server? Is it possible to bring that back with it's resource system or is that a RIP idea? I loved playing in scenario even if it was just building planets.
_________________
www.twitch.tv/watchtowerr

Azreal
Chief Marshal

Joined: March 14, 2004
Posts: 2800
From: United State of Texas, Houston
Posted: 2017-06-19 19:08   
If anyone remembers the old combat fatigue system in Star Wars Galaxies, Ive played a lil space app that uses that. It effectively keeps the ship from being fully repaired unless docked for a period of time to allow for full repairs. If you pull it right back out you only get 95% of your hull, even when "full health". Decrease additional 5% per death in that ship until fully repaired. Can be fully repaired by spending game cash, or expending a special mod thingy. Yeah, that's how games make money ALL THE TIME. Pull a different ship, no penalty in it until u die in it, then -5% total, etc, etc, etc....

This is still far better than the dumb beat you over the head for taking a risk system of pres loss.

Anyways, my view.
Get your own.
K.I.S.S.
_________________
bucket link



  Email Azreal   Goto the website of Azreal
Elfstar (Returning)
1st Lieutenant

Joined: March 15, 2015
Posts: 11
Posted: 2017-06-19 21:26   
Quote:
On 2017-06-17 13:53, Bardiche wrote:
I think DarkSpace lost players mostly due to lack of manpower to address issues with the game (staff's done an awesome job all these years though), and now that it's behind the times it's hard to drum up interest. A modernisation pass sharpening the game's identity is needed, but there's just not enough manpower available to make those changes (or properly iterate on them as a team).

For the past six weeks or so, I've been iterating on what a "DarkSpace V2" could look like by myself, at least design-wise. Wouldn't be able to code it, so it's just been a pleasure project.

Think DarkSpace as a "pick up and play" game that rewards some time investment is certainly workable, but it'd need to nix some measures discouraging play like prestige loss on death and the pay2win enhancements model which get damaged on defeat.

The more value is lost on dying, the less people are inclined to risk dying. And if you're not getting kills, what else is there to fight for?


[ This Message was edited by: Bardiche on 2017-06-17 14:10 ]



I agree with Bardichie. It was lack of manpower. Since I posed the question I think this is right. There was a lot of talk about faustus being the only programmer just before I left.
_________________


*Flash*
Chief Marshal

Joined: April 19, 2009
Posts: 278
From: Craiova
Posted: 2017-06-20 06:28   
How about to reduce the boring jump drive that takes 2 minutes to jump .. how long does it take to travel a sistem ??? Maybe coulc bring back the old ship layouts ? This is the main reason i stopped playing. People rank up to play with big ships but certanly small ships should not be useless Do this and see if there s a comeback from other players . .

[ This Message was edited by: *Flash* on 2017-06-20 06:29 ]
_________________

In space , no one can hear you scream!


  Email *Flash*
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights


Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2038
From: Michigan
Posted: 2017-06-20 22:31   
Of the people who I personally got to play DS one quit because she got sick of being ganked by luth while building at a supposedly safe planet with no sign of enemies around. Of course that's been addressed with the cloak being changed to a limited use ability but she dropped off the face of the earth a couple years back and I haven't seen her since.

Another quit because she just got bored, it took too long to rank up especially since she didn't have a lot of time to play. She did have fun with Frigates after I showed her how not to die constantly but she really wanted to try Cruisers and gave up after a couple weeks of slow progress.

The one guy I got to play didn't like the graphics, he played for like an hour then never tried it again.

Quote:
On 2017-06-18 10:46, Bardiche wrote:
I agree there needs to be some consequence attached to defeat (and could argue defeat itself is consequence enough) to dissuade people from dying, but without the idea that you could spend two hours grinding your rank only to lose it in two big fights. DarkSpace is pretty much a MOBA, but it still punishes players who lose too fiercely.

Because that punishment is so harsh, people try to avoid dying as much as possible, which leads to fighting only if they feel like they could win. Worse, shooting from great safety is equally rewarding prestige-wise so there is little incentive to actually go in and risk a loss.

So replacing that mechanic with maybe a respawn timer could work. Ships also need to be more accessible, and I'd argue players should spend far less time grinding to get to a bigger ship. From there, the grind should be into variations of that ship, which is what DarkSpace has already started doing somewhat, but not sufficient yet; consider that newer players stand absolutely no chance of destroying a Cruiser or Dread in their Corvette or Frigate and there's little for them to do.

EDIT: I speak in shoulds, but I don't think the developers need to even heed that; I'm sure they have their own vision, and I'm not one to say my vision is superior.



Yeah, it takes too long to rank up, it worked before but most "modern" gamers are too impatient and just want everything quick, especially in a pvp focused game. Cutting prestige requirements would probably be good if we want to keep more new players around.

The repair timer for ships is something. Sure people can just pull them out at a planet with a depot and sit and wait to repair, but if it was changed so you can't spawn anything larger than a Destroyer until it's finished repairing then it'd be better. No need for prestige loss, or at least not to the point where you can rank down.

Heck, even change it so if you wait for your ship to repair before pulling it out again after dying you don't lose dura on your enh, that would also be an incentive for people to spend more cash on enh to gear up multiple ships.

As far as Scouts and Frigates being unable to take out Cruisers or Dreads, that's only true for ICC Scouts and Frigates because they run out of ammo. UGTO and Luth are perfectly capable of it, I've done it myself several times, but then again I'm hardly a new player.

Quote:
On 2017-06-19 05:27, SnipeDragon wrote:
I think something like this could work, I also think that we should half current prestige requirements for ranks. I don't mean to make light of the accomplishments of current players who have grinded out their ranks and believe something can be done to honor current accomplishments, but I have shown several friends DarkSpace who are turned off after playing for a while and seeing how slow prestige gain can be. They see the "heavy duty" ships that they want to fly, then look at the requirements to use them which are understandably daunting from the perspective of a new player. We could even consider halving requirements for badges, all of this in an effort to make the game appear friendlier to newer players.

If we are going to lower the requirements of Tier 0 ships to Midshipman, or just lower them in general, I think it may be worth combing through the rank and badge requirements for every ship in the game. All of these mentioned changes should be fairly easy to implement, if it is decided to do so.




Lowering the rank requirement for t0 ships would help too, but the problem with having all tier 0 ships at midshipman is most people will ignore anything smaller than a Dreadnought then they'll get their asses kicked repeatedly by experienced players and ragequit anyway because constantly getting blown up isn't fun. The smaller ships are there to teach people how to play, the only thing people will learn by jumping straight into Dreadnoughts is how to give lots of pres to anyone shooting at them.

[ This Message was edited by: Talien on 2017-06-20 22:46 ]
_________________
Adapt or die.

Bardiche
Chief Marshal

Joined: November 16, 2006
Posts: 1244
Posted: 2017-06-21 03:22   
Quote:
As far as Scouts and Frigates being unable to take out Cruisers or Dreads, that's only true for ICC Scouts and Frigates because they run out of ammo. UGTO and Luth are perfectly capable of it, I've done it myself several times, but then again I'm hardly a new player.



No self-respecting Dreadnought would allow a Scout to take them out without just jumping away, is what I mean. Your opponent needs to allow you to finish them off, resulting in gameplay patterns where a newcomer can harass a veteran with little fear of reprisal... but stand no realistic chance of actually getting that thrill of first blood because it is so easy to just avoid combat altogether.

I would also argue that it is much more difficult to correctly play a scout versus scout battle than it is a dreadnought versus dreadnought battle; in that respect, I disagree that "smaller ships teach you how to play", as many intricacies of being a small ship do not apply to the larger ships.
[ This Message was edited by: Bardiche on 2017-06-21 03:23 ]
_________________


Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights


Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2038
From: Michigan
Posted: 2017-06-21 07:01   
Quote:
On 2017-06-21 03:22, Bardiche wrote:
Quote:
As far as Scouts and Frigates being unable to take out Cruisers or Dreads, that's only true for ICC Scouts and Frigates because they run out of ammo. UGTO and Luth are perfectly capable of it, I've done it myself several times, but then again I'm hardly a new player.



No self-respecting Dreadnought would allow a Scout to take them out without just jumping away, is what I mean. Your opponent needs to allow you to finish them off, resulting in gameplay patterns where a newcomer can harass a veteran with little fear of reprisal... but stand no realistic chance of actually getting that thrill of first blood because it is so easy to just avoid combat altogether.

I would also argue that it is much more difficult to correctly play a scout versus scout battle than it is a dreadnought versus dreadnought battle; in that respect, I disagree that "smaller ships teach you how to play", as many intricacies of being a small ship do not apply to the larger ships.



I didn't mean destroy, I meant get rid of them. It's remarkably easy to get someone to run away from a lone Scout when you start hitting hull and haven't taken a single hit in return. You don't have to blow the other person up to win just take them out of the fight, infact I much prefer when they run away because it takes longer for them to get back than if they had died and respawned.

And yes it most definitely is harder to do Scout vs. Scout because of how fast their JD recharges, it's as infuriating as it is fun to play cat and mouse with another Scout. Smaller ships teach you caution and how to get the most out of your defenses as well as how to maneuver so you maximize damage done and minimize damage taken, those principles stay the same up to Dreadnoughts. It's the difference between someone running away with low hull and 3 armor facings relatively intact (which happens rather often), and someone who can keep fighting until their armor and/or shields are gone and they get low on hull.

[ This Message was edited by: Talien on 2017-06-21 07:02 ]
_________________
Adapt or die.

Bardiche
Chief Marshal

Joined: November 16, 2006
Posts: 1244
Posted: 2017-06-21 13:13   
Quote:
On 2017-06-21 07:01, Talien wrote:

infact I much prefer when they run away because it takes longer for them to get back than if they had died and respawned.



Without meaning offence, I think this is the wrong attitude to take. DarkSpace is at its most fun when battles happen; the longer it takes someone to return to a fight, the less battles there will be.

Moreover, one must not take their personal enjoyment and use it as an argument to say a given state is good. Which feels more rewarding if you are new and a Generic Game Player? To spend ten minutes of combat with no losses on either side, or to spend five minutes and destroy the other's assets?

I hazard to say that destroying your opponent is more satisfying than forcing them to run, for a broader audience. Given the choice of getting +1 kill or 50 more prestige, I wager most would find the former more satisfying.

I also happen to think scout versus dread is unbalanced in that it is mostly the scout's battle to lose and the dread has far fewer options. A dreadnought should always have options in every fight to foster a feeling of player agency, instead of making them feel helpless and force them into making specific choices (get a smaller ship).

In short, I think for the average player destruction is more satisfying than putting to rout, and players should feel the freedom to make choices and not be forced into them.
_________________


Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights


Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2038
From: Michigan
Posted: 2017-06-21 15:58   
Quote:
On 2017-06-21 13:13, Bardiche wrote:
Without meaning offence, I think this is the wrong attitude to take. DarkSpace is at its most fun when battles happen; the longer it takes someone to return to a fight, the less battles there will be.

Moreover, one must not take their personal enjoyment and use it as an argument to say a given state is good. Which feels more rewarding if you are new and a Generic Game Player? To spend ten minutes of combat with no losses on either side, or to spend five minutes and destroy the other's assets?

I hazard to say that destroying your opponent is more satisfying than forcing them to run, for a broader audience. Given the choice of getting +1 kill or 50 more prestige, I wager most would find the former more satisfying.

I also happen to think scout versus dread is unbalanced in that it is mostly the scout's battle to lose and the dread has far fewer options. A dreadnought should always have options in every fight to foster a feeling of player agency, instead of making them feel helpless and force them into making specific choices (get a smaller ship).

In short, I think for the average player destruction is more satisfying than putting to rout, and players should feel the freedom to make choices and not be forced into them.



No offense taken, it's all a matter of personal opinion. I've always been a bigger picture person and if given the choice between "right now" satisfaction and something more long term I'll take long term every time.

A lone Dreadnought SHOULD be easy pickings for smaller ships, otherwise where's the balance? If a Dread can take anything and everything then there's no reason to use anything else. I mean, if joe blow takes a Dreadnought solo into an enemy held system then he's the one making the error, the consequence being he might get whupped by someone in a smaller ship who knows how to use them effectively. If someone goes solo into one of joe blow's systems with a smaller ship all he'd need to do is park at a planet with a depot or sit ontop of a repair platform and they can't touch him.

Yes it's more fun for more people to watch someone blow up after shooting at them for a while but forcing someone to retreat is no less of an option just because it's not as popular. Besides most people would rather retreat to avoid dura loss on their enh, and with fewer people playing it becomes harder to actually kill someone unless they decide to fight to the death or somehow get trapped and are unable to retreat.
_________________
Adapt or die.

SnipeDragon
Marshal

Joined: January 03, 2005
Posts: 34
From: Texas, USA
Posted: 2017-06-22 05:19   
Taking in the comments and suggestions from this post, here is what I propose, call it a "DarkSpace Revival." I believe the following changes need to be made, at least temporarily, until a solid player base exists in-game.

- Players need to gain access to bigger/better ships faster. I think the easiest way to accomplish this would be to cut prestige/point requirements for every rank/badge in half. This would be an easy modification to make.

- Ship enhancement durability loss needs to be removed or modified. Possibly make it so that enhancements for active subscribers do not lose durability on death?

- The penalty for taking a risk and dying needs to be nerfed or removed entirely. Prestige loss is something that turns off new players, who wants to spend hours grinding out to the next rank, only to lose all of your work in 10 minutes of combat by dying in your shiny new ship?

Personally, I do not think that all T0 ships should be available to a new player. Players need something to work towards, and speeding up progress for players is one way to rectify the problem. I do however believe that we could sit down and modify the requirements for some of the higher tier ships, making them easier to unlock.

Ultimately, I believe the goal should be to make DarkSpace a pick up and play game, as Bardiche put it. Fairly fast progression, little to no punishment for taking risks, and the return of the fleet battles (which would come with a player base) that we are so fond of.

I can't speak for Faustus, nor any other staff member, but I believe the Scenario Server could be brought back up once we have the monthly income to do so. If that happens, I think the AI spawn rate needs to be tweaked and lessened.

The upside to attracting the current generation of gamers to DarkSpace, is not only the restoration of a player base but also the real possibility of attracting interest from developers in that new player base. All its takes is a couple of interested people pushing a couple of updates to get the ball rolling.
_________________
Website Developer | Player Profile: AbueloHD

  Email SnipeDragon
nekofan5
Fleet Admiral

Joined: January 16, 2010
Posts: 4
From: Staten Island
Posted: 2017-06-24 00:51   
I liike SnipeDragon's summary of it, and furthermore attracting new developers to DarkSpace shouldn't be TOO difficult - there are hundreds of players who would return if the game received some much-needed love. The player-base may have receded, but I warrant that bringing back players to a much-beloved game is still easier than attracting entirely new ones; our task is many magnitudes easier than some entirely new game's. I myself didn't play for THREE years and recently returned and earned around 15,000-20,000 prestige in like 4 weeks, going to FA, just because I missed the damn game and got readdicted to it, and would've played it regularly for those lost 3 years if the game was more alive (Darkspace is at its best for me when those huge standoff battles happen).

The issue I see is that step one would consist of bringing some life into the game through bringing back some veterans to fill up the server at least a LITTLE bit (I honestly get depressed when I play for 3 hours and see just Entil hounding me, and sometimes Antoni shooting me from afar). While it doesn't seem like it would be horribly difficult to fix some of the issues that form the crux of the veterans' complaints (and consequently cause their absence), it WOULD be difficult (I believe) to reach out to enough of them, and perhaps organize play-times in which at least a dozen players can get together.

Who would be responsible for that? If Faustus even took the first few necessary steps to help make the game playable for those of us that have known it for 5-10 years, he cannot also notify this vast community of these changes and get them excited to play again, and to once again witness those gigantic battles. That is simply too much work for one man. If the desire to revive DarkSpace is real, MY belief is that it begins with an effort to bring back, excite and organize the old community (the more long-term changes to attract newcomers would come later) - but that requires at least several volunteers. Maybe some of the people who are still hanging around this game are willing to do that. I would be if I felt that the effort was promising (if others joined it).

That is just my two bits - the people posting here, all of whom, it seems, have played for longer than I, may see the problem differently. And my strategy relies on at least a small developer push, which is no small feat in a game that hasn't received real attention for ages, even if the changes required are minor (such as making jump times shorter, like Flash said, or removing durability loss upon death).
_________________
We CAN make Darkspace great again!


Rae
Admiral
Raven Warriors

Joined: May 23, 2002
Posts: 277
From: 10 minutes away in a fast boat
Posted: 2017-06-24 12:42   
@Snipedragon... is ANY of this likely to happen or is it just a pipe dream? I agree on most points with you.

-noobs don't need access to all ships, however maybe up to tier 2 destroyers? They really need some punch the scouts and frigates lack. That being said, there has to be something to work towards.

-prestige loss should be nerfed. Cooldown respawn timers ftw.

-limited damage to enhancements, making them repairable again w/cooldown.

-tweak to ai please. also, if possible resurrect some kind of mission system


From there the game is really playable and enjoyable. If there was one thing that I miss from all others, it was planet resources. That was the key to DS's success imo. It made systems valuable, and gave the game purpose.

Implement even the first 2 suggestions on the list, I'll subscrbe for a year to help out. Even if I don't play
_________________
-so precious lovin the thrill...

DiepLuc
Chief Marshal

Joined: March 23, 2010
Posts: 1186
Posted: 2017-06-25 06:06   
Waiting is the most essential factor that pushes everyone away
  • speed of station & dread
  • building structures
  • repairing station & dread
  • capturing planet & ships

I had had plan to archieve the last badge - the pirate platinum before leaving the game. But after months trying, I had never archieved and given up and quit this game.

The game mechanism is also a factor:
- No uncapturable planet. Fleeted player just log off when they have no planet in the map.
- Lack of resource to call ship out of garage. It like a ban of playing in urgent situation.
The developers have tried to balance the game in a very reasonable trend; it's fair and logical to be honest. Though the limiting gamers nowaday do not like that. They prefer calling a tremendous ship and drive away other small fries, just like they do with other games. It is what gamers have been taught in other MMO, it's like a popular and cruel culture anyway.

Another factor is mobile apps. They've been occupying all of our time throughout the days.

It's nice to hear old buddies I known still discuss in the forum. It's like time flying back.
_________________


kenetiks
Admiral
Galactic Navy


Joined: November 21, 2001
Posts: 1129
From: Bandcamp
Posted: 2017-06-25 10:19   
There are a lot of ideas floating around between games in the mmo field, and obviously some rather decent ones in the thread. As well as those not.

Perhaps taking a lesson from Eve(yes yes I know heresy and all that), and implementing two main concepts.

Two tier resource system. First, a players personal resources. Any ship you can fly, obviously you can fly it. But link it to a players personal resources. You can pull any ship out of your garage on the condition that the player has the resources to "purchase" or spontaneously build it. Second, an additional resource pool is their fleet, or Corporation if you will, has it's own additional resources that it can make available to it's membership.

Last but not least, timers. To make death punishable, or engagements, initiate weapons timers. The player can still use gates, move about the map, but once they fire on anything, start a five minute(or whatever) timer that means they have absolutely no safe harbor to dock in while the weapons timer is active. And every time they fire, the timer goes back to 5 minutes. Deaths themselves count against the players/fleet resources. In the same way they used to count against res in the old version of DS back in the day. Taking a ship takes res. Losing it, loses the res, putting it back parks it in the garage.

[ This Message was edited by: kenetiks on 2017-06-25 10:19 ]
_________________


  Email kenetiks   Goto the website of kenetiks
Bardiche
Chief Marshal

Joined: November 16, 2006
Posts: 1244
Posted: 2017-06-25 15:31   
All these ideas are for naught without a developer to see dreams come to fruition, though. But if anyone wants to have a brainstorm session purely as mental masturbation, I would happily schedule a date and time, hop on Discord and discuss ideas.
_________________


Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 Next Page )
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Page created in 0.030349 seconds.


Copyright © 2000 - 2017 Palestar Inc. All rights reserved worldwide.
Terms of use - DarkSpace is a Registered Trademark of PALESTAR