| Author |
Development Update 10/4/2005... |
Dwarden
Admiral
CHIMERA
Joined: June 07, 2001
Posts: 1072
From: Czech Republic
|  Posted: 2005-10-07 23:30
i skipped some posts but this need some answers
Quote:
|
1.Near death? Use a shipyard!
2.About to be captured? Use a shipyard!
3.Avoid enemy fire? Use a shipyard!
4.Want to WH spam? Use a shipyard!
5.Want to be able to thwart any attack at a moments notice regardless of position? Use a shipyard!
6.Want to camp an enemy homesystem for days on end? Use a shipyard! |
|
fixable
1. Can't dock until let says repaired from 75%
2. Can't dock while enemy boarding forces are alive onboard
3. In this case ... we need remove movement, change of course and jump and e-jump that helps avoid enemy fire too !
4. Devices like WH need code fix for recharge time after device install and after spawned from SY / gate
5. In thi case need to be fixed SY planet blockade code (plus limit SY to not be common on any planet in any ammount like i wrote in previous post earlier this thread)
6. Here comes in effect proper done blockage code ... if real fleet comes near noone will be able spawn NEW ships on that SY at all ... only already docked AT that SY !!!!
_________________
... Ideas? ... that's Ocean w/o borders !
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2005-10-07 23:34
Quote:
|
fixable
1. Can't dock until let says repaired from 75%
2. Can't dock while enemy boarding forces are alive onboard
3. In this case ... we need remove movement, change of course and jump and e-jump that helps avoid enemy fire too !
4. Devices like WH need code fix for recharge time after device install and after spawned from SY / gate
5. In thi case need to be fixed SY planet blockade code (plus limit SY to not be common on any planet in any ammount like i wrote in previous post earlier this thread)
6. Here comes in effect proper done blockage code ... if real fleet comes near noone will be able spawn NEW ships on that SY at all ... only already docked AT that SY !!!!
|
|
Now for the most powerful arguement to this ever...
You need to provide a compelling argument why we should implement these changes, when we can simply remove them from the game and prevent any further abuses from the fact, and return us to a 1.480 and before state which was far more fun than 1.481 and thereafter.
-Ent
_________________
|
AdmBito
Grand Admiral
Sundered Weimeriners
Joined: October 04, 2002
Posts: 1249
From: Its hard out here for a pimp
| Posted: 2005-10-07 23:36
Well, I hate to say it, but gameplay pre-this patch was tolerable enough for me. This patch (.48-whatever) completely killed combat for me. It does not feel as free and quick-like as it did; now, it just plods along, with cannons being the weapon of choice (with their huge range making battles very long range), and the combatants just wait until someone loses a quadrant of armor and jumps out. It has turned...boring. I miss torpedoes, close distance, planning-and-diving-in-to-close-to-beam-range type fights. Oh well, I suppose I am in the minority.
Also, at Shig: If there are only 2-3-ish Super Terran-type planets, do you think most of the battles will be centered at 2-3-ish areas in the Metaverse? With ships spawning in a "heavy industrial area" (let's pretend, stick with me now...), factions will strive to cut these areas off, and thus, I can foresee massive fights. Unfortunately, all of these fights will be centered in mostly the same places.
Although I have odd visions of very built up "super terran planets" and systems surrounding them, tapering off to the front-lines...that might be interesting.
_________________
Puppies gotta die, too.
|
AdmBito
Grand Admiral
Sundered Weimeriners
Joined: October 04, 2002
Posts: 1249
From: Its hard out here for a pimp
| Posted: 2005-10-08 00:25
Oh, and Faustus, while you're reading this post (hopefully I've caught you before you lost interest in the "yes/no" cries), ICC stations cannot change fighters out, be it for a different class, level, or even for the same ones they spawned with. Please look into this.
_________________
Puppies gotta die, too.
|
Diabo|ik
Grand Admiral
Joined: August 16, 2002
Posts: 327
From: Quebec, Canada
| Posted: 2005-10-08 08:20
"Oh well, I suppose I am in the minority"
You're certainly not the only one Bito... sadly. My guess is that most of the players thinking like you prefer to shut up as not to hurt the devs feelings about 1484 ship designs and the efforts they put to try to make a new balance and a new gameplay... It failed but it was a nice try nonetheless...
[ This Message was edited by: Diabo|ik on 2005-10-08 08:28 ]
_________________
Mostly Retired.
|
jefferson clay {F-WWOW}
Cadet
Joined: March 03, 2004
Posts: 39
From: Paris, France GMT+1
| Posted: 2005-10-08 09:30
Count me in the silent minority, from what I've seen in the current version combat has become pretty much boring/useless. Now it seems everything is more or less pre calculated: if your enemy's bigger than you, don't consider tryin g to attack it, once you'll get an armor arc down your hull will be teared into shreds in no time, nothing more involved.
I really miss what I'd call the minus one rule, if you're were flying a ship always be aware of enemy ships one class under, I really enjoyed taking ICC or kluths dreads with a torpedo cruiser, as much as I feared getting caught by a couple drainers or having to face Assault cruisers in an EAD ...
About SYs and WHs I've never known the game without them (joined march 2004) hence making it difficult for me to understand why you "real old vets" hate them so much.
I've often seen SYs as a good way to balance the lack of players, with a garage like 1TC, 1 bomber, 1 EAD, 1 supp, 1 light transport, 1 station all logged could allow to try bombing one system in which we had a SY already, dock real quick if a planet was under attack, spawn combat at the other end of MV to defend it, bring troops if needed somewhere, I think you get the point, and this with a very small number of players involved.
WH are a nice tactical enhancement, allowing fleets to transport themselves directly in the heart of enemy systems, they do not break anything as long as you keep in mind their range and the fact you can track them in nav. In the former MV I knew once kluths were getting close to Cincinatti / BS, Sol was just a couple hops from it, and we should prepare for a rough time.
But once again I've never known the game without those two features, and I can't really speak for something I haven't experienced.
Last thing, from what I read it looks like some vets act like the game belongs to them, and they want ti back to what they used to like, I may not be the way to help the playerbase grow by attracting new people to it.
In the end, it's just evolution and we'll all have to deal with it 
_________________
Enjoy, this is only a game ...
|
Coeus {NCX-Charger}
Admiral, I can't read,
Sundered Weimeriners
Joined: February 16, 2004
Posts: 3635
From: South Philly
| Posted: 2005-10-08 10:57
Bito, the daddy pants is NEVER considered the minority Especially not in this case...
_________________
Darkspace: Twilight
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2005-10-08 11:06
Quote:
|
About SYs and WHs I've never known the game without them (joined march 2004) hence making it difficult for me to understand why you "real old vets" hate them so much.
|
|
"Old vets" are not the only ones who hate them, FYI.
Quote:
|
I've often seen SYs as a good way to balance the lack of players, with a garage like 1TC, 1 bomber, 1 EAD, 1 supp, 1 light transport, 1 station all logged could allow to try bombing one system in which we had a SY already, dock real quick if a planet was under attack, spawn combat at the other end of MV to defend it, bring troops if needed somewhere, I think you get the point, and this with a very small number of players involved.
|
|
Its the reason here why some want SYs removed. See, DS is a team based game. It wasn't meant that one person could do everything on a whim. The way the MV is designed now is very different than before - so perhaps a change in structure would be needed.
Quote:
|
WH are a nice tactical enhancement, allowing fleets to transport themselves directly in the heart of enemy systems, they do not break anything as long as you keep in mind their range and the fact you can track them in nav. In the former MV I knew once kluths were getting close to Cincinatti / BS, Sol was just a couple hops from it, and we should prepare for a rough time.
|
|
WHs took out the strategy of the game for the most part. Your right, you'd have to experience 1.480 to know what I mean. Bombering WHing in someplace when there are few on and suddenly level a system and someone WHs them out...fleets that do the same, bypassing all systems and directly going for Homesystems out of spite. At least if this was done before WHs, you'd see them comming regardless - and could take the proper measures against them. With WHs, sure you can spot them, but there isn't someone in Nav 24/7 to spot them.
Quote:
|
But once again I've never known the game without those two features, and I can't really speak for something I haven't experienced.
Last thing, from what I read it looks like some vets act like the game belongs to them, and they want ti back to what they used to like, I may not be the way to help the playerbase grow by attracting new people to it.
In the end, it's just evolution and we'll all have to deal with it
|
|
Now thats assuming alot there. Old vets, no we do not feel this game "belongs" to us. We do have a certain feel of what we know works and what has worked before, and what attracted the majority of players. Yes, anyone who was in 1.480 will remember what it was like, and infact, then I never once heard of a complaint about not getting somewhere quick enough.
Sure, some hated gatecamping, but the majority loved it because it brought the aspect of major fleet battles - and at gates, that occured.
For many of those of then, we would by all means like 1.480 back again, and for those extremely old players, 1.3. But because rollbacks are not possible, we still do remember the things then that worked well, and the things that did not.
Here in this version, and ever since 1.481 one Wormholes and Shipyards have been used in ways that were not their origional purpose. Whether abused or missused, it destroyed some of the gameplay which many of us know. While I do enjoy sometimes the use of WHs to get someplace quickly, I still hate the fact that it would be alot more fun to blockade an enemys advancement, or bottleneck their progress on, because those were strategic elements in the game, and prevented somone from simply soloing the game.
After all, DS is a team game - and in some respects, these two "Evolutions" have to an extent both ruined and helped that fact. But for the most part, they have taken out some of the old concepts in the game, which were alot more fun, by the majority of people then, than it is currently.
There are more than just old vets here who would not miss the backs of WHs and SYs - consider that, before assuming that we think this game belongs to us.
-Ent
[ This Message was edited by: Enterprise on 2005-10-08 11:29 ]
_________________
|
Diabo|ik
Grand Admiral
Joined: August 16, 2002
Posts: 327
From: Quebec, Canada
| Posted: 2005-10-08 11:15
Ok, let's see what we can get out of this post that can be positive and what seems to be but is not...
Quote:
|
Count me in the silent minority, from what I've seen in the current version combat has become pretty much boring/useless. Now it seems everything is more or less pre calculated: if your enemy's bigger than you, don't consider tryin g to attack it, once you'll get an armor arc down your hull will be teared into shreds in no time, nothing more involved.
|
|
I think everyone agrees that this new combat system, relying heavily on armors/shields looks a lot like an old build where the hull ratings were too low and had to be doubled or even tripled to increase the survavibility of the smaller ships versus the big ones, is not what it was meant to be. But I still think that the pre-1483 hull/armor/shield/weapon's balance was much better and promoted skill and variety in battles instead of what we all tend to do now... get behind and pump the guns, or sit far away and pound. You know what they say, don't try to change a winning formula because you "feel like it"... That's what we did in this case...
Quote:
|
I really miss what I'd call the minus one rule, if you're were flying a ship always be aware of enemy ships one class under, I really enjoyed taking ICC or kluths dreads with a torpedo cruiser, as much as I feared getting caught by a couple drainers or having to face Assault cruisers in an EAD ...
|
|
See the answer above... And I can't do a thing but agree with you. I really miss the old style fights... They were much funnier.
Quote:
|
About SYs and WHs I've never known the game without them (joined march 2004) hence making it difficult for me to understand why you "real old vets" hate them so much.
|
|
See the above answers... Navigation was fine before with the old 3-way MV map scheme with most systems next to each other interconnected, it was much easier to travel on your own than it is now, and much faster. The main gripes us "old vets" ( I feel like a gramp saying that  ) have with the "instantaneous" travel schemes is that it removes a lot of tactical and strategic elements of the pre-SY-WH era. You actually had to cap system after system in a linear way because of the defenses being more tight, navigation was almost 100% gate based, it was easier to intercept an invading fleet before they reached your home/mod planets unless you got surprised with your pants down. And even if they did reach the system unseen, capping/bombing planets was WAY harder than it is now, requiring massive teamwork ( you have to witness the old style 2 supplies, 4 bombers bombing runs to get down 200%+ shield planets in a few runs ( yeah, not just ONE run... ).
Which bombing runs had to be protected, sometimes the bombers switched to combat ships and came to clear the enemies so as to be able to continu to bomb later. Alternately, you could just try to cap it without killing the enemy infantry first ( back then it was the main concern, to capture and to fight, bombing was very secondary ), but it was harder and much more infantry consuming. Right now a lone scout bomber could probably cap a lot of planets on his own before being caught with only 1 infantry... Talk about teamwork... This promotes guerilla warfare, same with SYs and WHs. It doesn't promote fleet to fleet battles.
Quote:
|
I've often seen SYs as a good way to balance the lack of players, with a garage like 1TC, 1 bomber, 1 EAD, 1 supp, 1 light transport, 1 station all logged could allow to try bombing one system in which we had a SY already, dock real quick if a planet was under attack, spawn combat at the other end of MV to defend it, bring troops if needed somewhere, I think you get the point, and this with a very small number of players involved.
|
|
There wasn't a lack of players pre-sy-wh era, I had my best fleet battles during the 1480 era. And by fleets, I mean, destroyers, the occasional frigates, scouts ( for the beacons if there was K'luth nearby and a willing pilot ), cruisers, supplies a plenty, the occasinal bomber, an interdictor, and a few dreadnoughts. Stations we're reserved for large scale fleet invasions and served mainly to transport infantry and to attract planetary fire while being protected from the enemy ships by his escort which was carrying extra infantry. Supplies were omnipresent, if you didn't had a supply, YOU COULDN'T CAP CRAP. No more an issue... Which is sad. And warping across the MV like this using the SY was a side effect and not an intended effect... Which detriments strategy ( can't cut enemy resupply lines... ) and tactical elements ( traps, minefields, dictor blocking a gate to prevent infantry resupplies and easy movement from and to 2 strategic systems and the list goes on and on... ).
Quote:
|
WH are a nice tactical enhancement, allowing fleets to transport themselves directly in the heart of enemy systems, they do not break anything as long as you keep in mind their range and the fact you can track them in nav. In the former MV I knew once kluths were getting close to Cincinatti / BS, Sol was just a couple hops from it, and we should prepare for a rough time.
|
|
See the above answer... they break all those tactical and strategic elements... There is no "front" anymore, the front is everywhere, it can be your farthest planet at 12:20 pm or your homeworld some 10 minutes later... This is a bit stupid you can agree... Furthermore the old 3-way MV design ( someone please dig up a pic of it for the new players so they can understand how it worked and the beauty and simplicity of it's design ) prevented such homeworld strikes if there was a few ( 4-5 ) ships logged on.
Quote:
|
But once again I've never known the game without those two features, and I can't really speak for something I haven't experienced.
Last thing, from what I read it looks like some vets act like the game belongs to them, and they want ti back to what they used to like, I may not be the way to help the playerbase grow by attracting new people to it.
In the end, it's just evolution and we'll all have to deal with it
|
|
Thank you for being humble and keeping an open mind.
We "veterans" just try to explain to you what is lost, what this game concept was meant to be, what it is and how you shouldn't change a winning formula that got me addicted to the point of waiting 2 years for a fix to the current problems... The low playerbase "problem" of Darkspace is not about the new changes versus the old way. It's about a lack of marketing and a lack of willingness from the devs to invest risky ( albeit absent ) precious dollars into the venture... This has been a known concern from before I even joined the community...
So as you can possibly understand what I mean, I'll have to dig up the old MV map. But what I can do right now is tell you, imagine 1482 ship balance, without the flux issue and without any lag with all the lost above mentioned strategic and tactical elements added in...
About evolution, losing 3/4 of a factions ( K'luth ) playerbase since the introduction of SYs and WHs as well as a lot of old dedicated players as well as losing the ship balance and a fun combat scheme, pour in some awfull lag. This isn't what I'd like to call evolution...
But I'm open to suggestions, as long as they keep the aforementioned strategic/tactical elements. If you an marry those and the WHs and SYs with a brilliant idea, I'll be willing to discuss it and refine it. But in 2 years, many tried, all failed. I wish you good luck as I'm out of ideas other than trying to keep all the good aspects of the old builds while trying to get rid of all of the same builds negative aspects, which seems like the wisest choice.
[ This Message was edited by: Diabo|ik on 2005-10-08 11:20 ]
_________________
Mostly Retired.
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2005-10-08 11:38
Cruisers shouldn't be able to take on dreads 1v1.
Full stop.
_________________
|
vlc
Cadet
Joined: September 23, 2005
Posts: 6
| Posted: 2005-10-08 11:42
Hey all,
I started playing this game 2 weeks ago. What made me subscribe were the insane battles on the newb server if the MV was down - good teamwork and kind people kinda sealed the deal.
I dont wanna get too Off-Topic, but as it stands now the MV is really not that much fun. What u vets described prior 1483 sounded just amazing and reminds me of 2 or 3 battles on the newb server or even better.
Is Faustus reads this - I'll continue to play until the subscription ends, after that it depends on all those Issues fixed. Having a whole system capped by a lone bomber dread sucks. Seeing that none of all those great possibilities of Space combat strategy apply in no way here (any more?) feels pretty sad - as this game really has potential.
Greetings,vlc
[ This Message was edited by: vlc on 2005-10-08 13:24 ]
_________________
|
jefferson clay {F-WWOW}
Cadet
Joined: March 03, 2004
Posts: 39
From: Paris, France GMT+1
| Posted: 2005-10-08 12:06
I didn't mean to upset anyone nor assume anything beyond my sight. I was just sharing my experience from a post 1.480 player, who if not a real full time vet (I know I keep subbing/ unsubbing, but that seems a decent option to me instead of having to bitch about known issues), had a neat experience of the versions he played.
Anyway maybe that last statement got misunderstood or just didn't come handy at all.
(i'm too lazy to take pics of these 2 eurocents I have on my desk but you get it).
_________________
Enjoy, this is only a game ...
|
Axalon
Vice Admiral
Joined: June 15, 2003
Posts: 442
From: East Windsor, NJ, USA
| Posted: 2005-10-08 14:02
DISCLAIMER: Now, I've been playing a large amount of WoW lately, and that (kinda) inspires another way that wormholes can work.
As it stands right now, stations can make a wormhole to any point on the map within range. Something that would make sense on a realistic and tactical way is that you need TWO stations to make a wormhole. For example: one station is at Ross 148 with a fleet while a second station is in Nicea with a fleet fighting. In order to effectively link the two, each station would have to open their end of their wormhole and link them.
[How WoW is involved]Warlock has a spell called Ritual of Summoning. It creates a portal, and in order for the portal to successfully open, you need two "helpers" click on the portal to open it. You cannot move during this process. [/WoW]
Therefore, one station could open a WH, and the station at the projected end would need to open their end (maybe by selecting the diamond where the endpoint would be, but no WH graphic [IE: just a diamond floating in space, like jettisoned cargo]) by activating their WH device. With shipyards out of the picture, wormholes can be of real strategic importance. And by requiring two stations to act as "endpoints", you don't break the "front lines", as someone in a station would have had to have gone through all the gates, as usual. That said, i would recommend that it is implemented by :
- A. The wormhole lasts longer than usual
- B. The wormhole stays open indefinately until one of the endpoint stations goes through
- C. Same as B, except keeping the WH open incurs a steady energy drain on the station, and the WH collapses when the station runs out of energy.
Just my 2 cents. Please comment, edit, call me an idiot. I can take it, I'm a big boy .
-Axalon
_________________
|
ReZ
Vice Admiral
Joined: March 18, 2004
Posts: 59
From: Eh?
| Posted: 2005-10-08 14:30
Someone said the 'vets' know what the game should be like, well.. no disrespect. But the only person that can say that is the person who came up with the game in the first place.
Now, after reading a hefty number of posts and essays on what should be removed what shouldnt be etc etc, it seems like a number of those who have commented cant seem to realise that 480 isnt coming back.
I read another reply noting that most of the playerbase were pre and during 480, while that is debatable we do have alot of players that have joined within the last year, and have not experienced the no SY or no WH feeling. To them, they are and seemingly always have been a permanent fixture and necessity to the game.
While i agree without a doubt that those 2 components are and have been abused for a long time, its difficult to say how the new additions to the playerbase will take it by removing them entirely.
On to another reply i had read, concerning something about there being hardly any complaints to the aspects of the 480 patch. Now it is likly i could be totally wrong, but there were a buttload of complaints about the gameplay, ships, etc.
Now, while i dont mean to smash or flame or hate on anyones opinion, which is what i saw this slowly turning into. I wanted to take time and acknowledge someone saying that this game is in constant evolution, and we all must adapt.
480 is gone, i'm sorry that the appeal from that version is gone from some of you as well, some of the 'vet's have simply learned to move on from that, others are seemingly so hoplessly caught in the retro of it that they stay unsubbed, sit in the lobby and rant about how much the gameplay sucks now. Thats their choice i suppose, and they can argue all they want that they have an idea that they know whats best for the game, and what worked well. While some of them may have valid arguements on the latter, the fact of the matter is the creator of the game wanted to take it someplace else. Direction? only he knows.
Ent, made some good arguements, and personally i'm on the fence about the removal of the SY's.. the WH's however, i can agree to the possibility of scrapping them entirely.
While you all make some pretty good suggestions, worthy of faustus to consider; and i'm not entirely crazy about this version either. I think all of those who have voiced their opinion here can agree that both the SY's and WH capabilities need a lookover, as well as some other aspects that noone has yet to dive into.
Open minds prevail,
_________________
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2005-10-08 14:45
Quote:
|
Now, after reading a hefty number of posts and essays on what should be removed what shouldnt be etc etc, it seems like a number of those who have commented cant seem to realise that 480 isnt coming back.
|
|
We know its not - but no one said aspects of it cannot be returned.
Quote:
|
On to another reply i had read, concerning something about there being hardly any complaints to the aspects of the 480 patch. Now it is likly i could be totally wrong, but there were a buttload of complaints about the gameplay, ships, etc.
|
|
That reply concerned travelling. But perhaps you didn't read that part, you simply saw no complaints. Of course there were complaints about gameplay and ships, that common knowledge.
Quote:
|
Now, while i dont mean to smash or flame or hate on anyones opinion, which is what i saw this slowly turning into. I wanted to take time and acknowledge someone saying that this game is in constant evolution, and we all must adapt.
480 is gone, i'm sorry that the appeal from that version is gone from some of you as well, some of the 'vet's have simply learned to move on from that, others are seemingly so hoplessly caught in the retro of it that they stay unsubbed, sit in the lobby and rant about how much the gameplay sucks now. Thats their choice i suppose, and they can argue all they want that they have an idea that they know whats best for the game, and what worked well. While some of them may have valid arguements on the latter, the fact of the matter is the creator of the game wanted to take it someplace else. Direction? only he knows.
|
|
Adapt? Well perhaps, if you can adapt (as we all have) to WHs in SYs in the past few years, try adapting without them. Instead of complaining that it could have adverse effects on new players, perhaps they, too, should adapt to an evolution such as that.
It is F choice - however we all do have the power to influence his choices - and he asked for the arguement, and it was given.
Quote:
|
Ent, made some good arguements, and personally i'm on the fence about the removal of the SY's.. the WH's however, i can agree to the possibility of scrapping them entirely.
|
|
You have to be the thrid or fourth person to say that but still lack to bring any compelling reasons why we should keep them...
You also indeed, provide no evidence why you feel WHs should be removed.
I dont seem to understand this - people want to keep something yet do not explain why? There are people here who argued finer points to why they should be removed, yet no one seems to be argueing why we should keep them.
Again, I also dont see why we should change a flaw to somethign that can potentially become another flaw, when infact we can return to state which we know works from past experience.
And for the last time - its not just 'vets' who want them removed - I suggest to read these posts again.
-Ent
_________________
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
