Author |
Sieging and Missles. |
Rae Admiral Raven Warriors
Joined: May 23, 2002 Posts: 284 From: 10 minutes away in a fast boat
| Posted: 2014-04-09 18:02  
Quote:
On 2014-04-08 21:32, Ent wrote:
There is nothing stopping a large group of people from jumping a planet at the same time.
The only thing stopping people is the knowledge that someone is probably going to die before the dictor gets taken down.
|
Well, I hate to be that guy and point out the error in your logic, so I'll try and be gentle. Please define your idea of a "large group." Is that 2 icc vs 3 ugto, 3 ugto vs 3 kluth, or one lonely defender vs 17 ai?
Darkspace has always succumbed to the Field of Dreams mentality (if you build it they will come) and I'm sure in the current state of the game that a battle of 30+ players would be most enjoyable. However, you don't have the playerbase to accomplish that, and there seems to be no effort being made to fix it.
Telling someone to attack in a large group when there are no players on is kind of like asking them to bang their head against a wall. I realize it doesn't stop you from asking anyways, but don't expect people to take you seriously.
[ This Message was edited by: Rae on 2014-04-09 18:10 ]
_________________ -so precious lovin the thrill...
|
Orkan [OO-XII] Grand Admiral The Myrmidon Legion
Joined: April 22, 2010 Posts: 201 From: A Point Perfectly Computed Yet Never Repeating
| Posted: 2014-04-09 20:29  
-------THREAD HIJACK ALERT-------
Quote:
Well, I hate to be that guy and point out the error in your logic, so I'll try and be gentle. Please define your idea of a "large group." Is that 2 icc vs 3 ugto, 3 ugto vs 3 kluth, or one lonely defender vs 17 ai?
Darkspace has always succumbed to the Field of Dreams mentality (if you build it they will come) and I'm sure in the current state of the game that a battle of 30+ players would be most enjoyable. However, you don't have the playerbase to accomplish that, and there seems to be no effort being made to fix it.
Telling someone to attack in a large group when there are no players on is kind of like asking them to bang their head against a wall. I realize it doesn't stop you from asking anyways, but don't expect people to take you seriously.
[ This Message was edited by: Orkan [OO-XII] on 2014-04-09 20:32 ]
|
I and others are making an active effort to increase the profile of Darkspace amongst the gaming community. FTL and ML is running an active recruitment program which now spans many gaming communities (including the upcoming Star Citizen and other games) and which is looking for active players to join us all the time.
We also have multiple teamspeaks for multiple purposes.
Join us and help raise the profile of DS so that we can get closer to achieving that ideal 20 a faction playerbase that makes fleet battles in the MV so great.
If you are active and feel passionately about this we have ways in which you can get involved.
Contact me direct and I will tell you all about it and answer any questions you may have.
We have a plan and we are already executing it.
My Mail:
Orkanorpatdarkspace@gmail.com
The Plan:
http://www.darkspace.net/index.htm?module=forums.php&page=/viewtopic.php?topic=54474&forum=1&10
Thread Necromancy:
http://www.darkspace.net/index.htm?module=forums.php&page=/viewtopic.php?topic=53392&forum=172&17
_________________
|
Enterprise Chief Marshal Raven Warriors
Joined: May 19, 2002 Posts: 2576 From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2014-04-10 10:34  
Quote:
On 2014-04-09 18:02, Rae wrote:
Quote:
On 2014-04-08 21:32, Ent wrote:
There is nothing stopping a large group of people from jumping a planet at the same time.
The only thing stopping people is the knowledge that someone is probably going to die before the dictor gets taken down.
|
Well, I hate to be that guy and point out the error in your logic, so I'll try and be gentle. Please define your idea of a "large group." Is that 2 icc vs 3 ugto, 3 ugto vs 3 kluth, or one lonely defender vs 17 ai?
Darkspace has always succumbed to the Field of Dreams mentality (if you build it they will come) and I'm sure in the current state of the game that a battle of 30+ players would be most enjoyable. However, you don't have the playerbase to accomplish that, and there seems to be no effort being made to fix it.
Telling someone to attack in a large group when there are no players on is kind of like asking them to bang their head against a wall. I realize it doesn't stop you from asking anyways, but don't expect people to take you seriously.
[ This Message was edited by: Rae on 2014-04-09 18:10 ]
|
I have actively watched (and particpated) in scenarios where odds as much as 3:1 were still not enough to convince the attacking fleet to engage a bunch of missile ships at close range in an interdictor.
10vs3, 9vs2.. been there and seen it. Its an interesting thing to watch.
While I certainly don't expect people to pull miracles out of nowhere, people do decidedly choose not to attack even if they do happen to have numerical superiority. This aversion to attacking planets seems to disappear entirely when the interdictor is removed, even when grossly outnumbered.
Part of helping improve the game is by observing how and why players react to different situations. It's been pretty clear to me for a while that people really really don't like to lose progression, and will avoid any chance of it however it small it is. It's why I don't think the ships themselves are the problem, or planets really, but one very specific feature.
Please take the time to review this thread:
http://www.darkspace.net/index.htm?module=forums.php&page=/viewtopic.php&topic=54446&forum=285
-Ent
_________________
|
Incinarator Chief Marshal
Joined: May 24, 2010 Posts: 237
| Posted: 2014-04-10 11:28  
Quote:
On 2014-04-10 10:34, Ent wrote:
Quote:
On 2014-04-09 18:02, Rae wrote:
Quote:
On 2014-04-08 21:32, Ent wrote:
There is nothing stopping a large group of people from jumping a planet at the same time.
The only thing stopping people is the knowledge that someone is probably going to die before the dictor gets taken down.
|
Well, I hate to be that guy and point out the error in your logic, so I'll try and be gentle. Please define your idea of a "large group." Is that 2 icc vs 3 ugto, 3 ugto vs 3 kluth, or one lonely defender vs 17 ai?
Darkspace has always succumbed to the Field of Dreams mentality (if you build it they will come) and I'm sure in the current state of the game that a battle of 30+ players would be most enjoyable. However, you don't have the playerbase to accomplish that, and there seems to be no effort being made to fix it.
Telling someone to attack in a large group when there are no players on is kind of like asking them to bang their head against a wall. I realize it doesn't stop you from asking anyways, but don't expect people to take you seriously.
[ This Message was edited by: Rae on 2014-04-09 18:10 ]
|
I have actively watched (and particpated) in scenarios where odds as much as 3:1 were still not enough to convince the attacking fleet to engage a bunch of missile ships at close range in an interdictor.
10vs3, 9vs2.. been there and seen it. Its an interesting thing to watch.
While I certainly don't expect people to pull miracles out of nowhere, people do decidedly choose not to attack even if they do happen to have numerical superiority. This aversion to attacking planets seems to disappear entirely when the interdictor is removed, even when grossly outnumbered.
Part of helping improve the game is by observing how and why players react to different situations. It's been pretty clear to me for a while that people really really don't like to lose progression, and will avoid any chance of it however it small it is. It's why I don't think the ships themselves are the problem, or planets really, but one very specific feature.
Please take the time to review this thread:
http://www.darkspace.net/index.htm?module=forums.php&page=/viewtopic.php&topic=54446&forum=285
-Ent
|
I have to agree with Ent here. Even when one team had the numbers to support a large scale invasion against another it could usually be held off by a few ships at a planet so long as it has an interdictor. If the larger team gets the interdictor down... it either turns into a slaughter or the smalller team retreats.
In addition to what Ent said, people also have an aversion to missing opportunities to progress. The large fleet could easily counter the small fleet if just a few of the players got into PD ships or EWAR ships but few ever do because it means that those players miss out on a chance to get something more than a pat on the back and a little prestiege from grouping.
_________________ I be rebuilding your planets!
|
Talien Marshal Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010 Posts: 2044 From: Michigan
| Posted: 2014-04-10 11:59  
There's PLENTY of people who no longer need pres but still don't want to use role specific ships. Many of the people who actually enjoy such roles no longer play because the game is so watered down it's just not fun anymore, or like me, are just too busy with RL stuff.
It's too bad that some kind of class balancing is taboo here, at least that way we wouldn't constantly end up with people in nothing but combat ships complaining that there's no combat because nobody wants to leave their planets. Even if Planetary Interdictors are removed there still won't be any combat because the outnumbered side will have absolutely nowhere to go and will log off to avoid being farmed. At least now there's a CHOICE for the attackers to bring the proper ships in to deal with planets, it's just a matter of people choosing not to and then complaining about the results of their own choices. [ This Message was edited by: Talien on 2014-04-10 12:05 ]
_________________ Adapt or die.
|
Enterprise Chief Marshal Raven Warriors
Joined: May 19, 2002 Posts: 2576 From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2014-04-10 13:26  
Quote:
On 2014-04-10 11:59, Talien wrote:
There's PLENTY of people who no longer need pres but still don't want to use role specific ships. Many of the people who actually enjoy such roles no longer play because the game is so watered down it's just not fun anymore, or like me, are just too busy with RL stuff.
It's too bad that some kind of class balancing is taboo here, at least that way we wouldn't constantly end up with people in nothing but combat ships complaining that there's no combat because nobody wants to leave their planets. Even if Planetary Interdictors are removed there still won't be any combat because the outnumbered side will have absolutely nowhere to go and will log off to avoid being farmed. At least now there's a CHOICE for the attackers to bring the proper ships in to deal with planets, it's just a matter of people choosing not to and then complaining about the results of their own choices.
[ This Message was edited by: Ent on 2014-04-10 13:31 ]
|
I think this is an important point to consider, but remember that planets can be built to be very sturdy, and in future patches will be even stronger.
I think as far as numbers balancing goes, at some point we are going to have to incentivise balanced factions. I don't think we can ever completely eliminate being outnumbers, and hey, sorry but sometimes someone has to lose.
I think thats something of a flaw in that losing is neccessary in the game in order for it to progress, but losing is very harsh.
I think we should reconsider at some point the death penalty. I personally think the game would be better off without it, and instead you gain more prestige the longer you live (multipler bonuses per hour lived in a ship), and possible badges associated with such things.
Why do I think the death penalty is such a negative thing? It breeds an overly competitive and hostile atmosphere. I might even say at times toxic. I think it really puts off new players as well, which is something we really want to avoid, don't we?
I think we can do better than outright erase progression, personally. I don't think people would mind being outnumbered or dieing so much if it didn't actually set you back. I personally think the issue of constant suicide can be avoided by something as simple as a 300 second cooldown after five consecutive deaths under 300 seconds, or reducing the amount of prestige a person gains after consectuive deaths to zero, so they gain nothing for throwing their ships away.
I think we avoid easy solutions because we like to perseve an ideal 'risk' based game, but in reality it is often unfair and unrewarding. I think its something to consider.
-Ent
_________________
|
Talien Marshal Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010 Posts: 2044 From: Michigan
| Posted: 2014-04-10 15:24  
Quote:
On 2014-04-10 13:26, Ent wrote:
I think this is an important point to consider, but remember that planets can be built to be very sturdy, and in future patches will be even stronger.
I think as far as numbers balancing goes, at some point we are going to have to incentivise balanced factions. I don't think we can ever completely eliminate being outnumbers, and hey, sorry but sometimes someone has to lose.
I think thats something of a flaw in that losing is neccessary in the game in order for it to progress, but losing is very harsh.
I think we should reconsider at some point the death penalty. I personally think the game would be better off without it, and instead you gain more prestige the longer you live (multipler bonuses per hour lived in a ship), and possible badges associated with such things.
Why do I think the death penalty is such a negative thing? It breeds an overly competitive and hostile atmosphere. I might even say at times toxic. I think it really puts off new players as well, which is something we really want to avoid, don't we?
I think we can do better than outright erase progression, personally. I don't think people would mind being outnumbered or dieing so much if it didn't actually set you back. I personally think the issue of constant suicide can be avoided by something as simple as a 300 second cooldown after five consecutive deaths under 300 seconds, or reducing the amount of prestige a person gains after consectuive deaths to zero, so they gain nothing for throwing their ships away.
I think we avoid easy solutions because we like to perseve an ideal 'risk' based game, but in reality it is often unfair and unrewarding. I think its something to consider.
-Ent
|
I wonder if it'd be possible to give each individual ship in a player's garage it's own cooldown based on hull size (call it a repair timer) when it gets blown up, that could be another solution. Right now the death penalty is the only thing keeping people from spawning Dreadnought after Dreadnought and throwing them away like in 1.5x.
_________________ Adapt or die.
|
-xTc- ExisT Chief Marshal Army Of Darkness
Joined: March 20, 2010 Posts: 534 From: Red Lobster
| Posted: 2014-04-10 22:14  
Quote:
On 2014-04-10 13:26, Ent wrote:
Why do I think the death penalty is such a negative thing? It breeds an overly competitive and hostile atmosphere. I might even say at times toxic. I think it really puts off new players as well, which is something we really want to avoid, don't we?
-Ent
|
A too competitive atmosphere is indeed a bad thing.
I was once a part of a very small(70-100 people) community of an old, 14 years outdated, but ultra competitive, game. The community and most players in general were so competitive and hostile to each other, that the game eventually shredded itself. New players were given the typical "gtfo noob, you suck" instead of being welcomed in and taught the game. New players had to learn a fairly difficult, tactical team game by losing badly over and over and over all while dealing with the typical negative 13yo call of duty bs, so it was an extremely rare for a new player to stick around very long.
This game today now has maybe 5-10 dedicated players left. It couldn't stay afloat and had to be ported to flash and hosted via Kongregate to remain playble.
Point being a competitive environment is quite fun but too competitve with a small growth community will kill your game. Is DS like this currently? Not by a long shot, but often the atmosphere is somewhat that way.
Just my thoughts
_________________ *Connection lost, attempting reconnect in 30 seconds....
Do you really want to just pay bills until you die?
|
Code Red Chief Marshal Non Omnis Moriar
Joined: September 08, 2007 Posts: 184
| Posted: 2014-04-11 03:16  
"Even if Planetary Interdictors are removed there still won't be any combat because the outnumbered side will have absolutely nowhere to go and will log off to avoid being farmed. At least now there's a CHOICE for the attackers to bring the proper ships in to deal with planets, it's just a matter of people choosing not to and then complaining about the results of their own choices."
I agree with the above , removal of dico's totally will result in players logging off if severely outnumbered , I agree that there are alternatives like gravity wells etc that could be added as per the other thread ,but lets be honest, if your team really wants that dico down to enable the removal of the enemy ships, then these decisions re ship choice, and the defenders decisions thereafter whether to counter correctly, are some of the few remaining big challenges in game.
We can no longer build death stars (sadly), planets need a strategic reason for the fighting , the resource needs to be viable in game again and certain resources for spawning / building (dicos maybe?) need to be rare and hence increase the value of the planets that hold them , then via the new plantery system we should be able to build a stronger def planet than we have now and this will require a team to engage and nullify the planet.
Also my probably unpopular thoughts re fleets are : if unfleeted = access only to Tier 1 + 2 of a factions ships and 8 slots per faction , if fleeted = access to all Tiers (if qualified) and the current 12 slots. This would promote fleets into being viable again and if fleet control of planets and their valuable resources could be tied in with fleet rankings and some benefits in game then this would also help fleets grow.
Love and Peace to all
Red
_________________
Code Red, For winning in the 1RA Fleet Wars event, here's your coupon for a week.
|
pigghoti Vice Admiral
Joined: November 23, 2013 Posts: 10
| Posted: 2014-04-11 09:32  
i think it relates to this topic but idk, what are seige missiles for? i thought they might be for planets but they don't do anything of worth; tried attacking ships but that was fruitless. any ideas on what they are used for?
_________________
|
Talien Marshal Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010 Posts: 2044 From: Michigan
| Posted: 2014-04-11 10:25  
Quote:
On 2014-04-11 09:32, pigghoti wrote:
i think it relates to this topic but idk, what are seige missiles for? i thought they might be for planets but they don't do anything of worth; tried attacking ships but that was fruitless. any ideas on what they are used for?
|
They're for attacking planets but they've been glitched for a very long time, just use regular bombs instead.
_________________ Adapt or die.
|
pigghoti Vice Admiral
Joined: November 23, 2013 Posts: 10
| Posted: 2014-04-11 11:03  
Quote:
On 2014-04-11 10:25, Talien wrote:
Quote:
On 2014-04-11 09:32, pigghoti wrote:
i think it relates to this topic but idk, what are seige missiles for? i thought they might be for planets but they don't do anything of worth; tried attacking ships but that was fruitless. any ideas on what they are used for?
|
They're for attacking planets but they've been glitched for a very long time, just use regular bombs instead.
|
oh, ok, that makes sense.
_________________
|
Iwancoppa Fleet Admiral
Joined: November 15, 2008 Posts: 709
| Posted: 2014-04-21 10:58  
Here's a planet siege missile secret. They're brutal for depopulating planets, and you get a ton of them. Simply sit back, and fire away. You can do this from a standoff range in a combat situation, espcially if the enemy is hiding and not PDing missiles. A constant stream is easy to do and will de-pop a world. PSMs are niche but work well.
_________________
|
pigghoti Vice Admiral
Joined: November 23, 2013 Posts: 10
| Posted: 2014-04-23 14:30  
Quote:
On 2014-04-21 10:58, Iwancoppa wrote:
Here's a planet siege missile secret. They're brutal for depopulating planets, and you get a ton of them. Simply sit back, and fire away. You can do this from a standoff range in a combat situation, espcially if the enemy is hiding and not PDing missiles. A constant stream is easy to do and will de-pop a world. PSMs are niche but work well.
|
then, wouldn't this solve our camping problem? sit out with bombers, pounding the planet with as many missiles as you can until the planet revolts or the interdictor has no more manpower or power to work due to lack of population. kinda long game but would work if enough people were doing so and were stealthed in doing so.
_________________
|
Chewy Squirrel Chief Marshal
Joined: January 27, 2003 Posts: 304 From: NYC
| Posted: 2014-04-23 16:04  
Quote:
On 2014-04-21 10:58, Iwancoppa wrote:
Here's a planet siege missile secret. They're brutal for depopulating planets, and you get a ton of them. Simply sit back, and fire away. You can do this from a standoff range in a combat situation, espcially if the enemy is hiding and not PDing missiles. A constant stream is easy to do and will de-pop a world. PSMs are niche but work well.
|
Until someone grabs their 80% T3 engy and builds 5 defence plats in 35 seconds, and then you are back to square one. Although the new siege torps might help...
_________________
|