| Author |
Prestige loss |
GothThug {C?}
Fleet Admiral
Joined: June 29, 2005
Posts: 2932
|  Posted: 2007-06-19 00:30
Well, since i figured that we get our ship back after we're destroyed i was kinda hoping that prestige loss would be a thing of the past like gone...no prestige loss...no angry players  or atleast Reduce it significantly to where no one gets ticked off after they die like say for:
Dreads: 150 Pres Lost after Destruction
Cruisers: 100 After Destruction
Dessie: 80 After Destruction
Support Station: 400
Battle Station Class: 800+
Command Station Class 1000+
Thats Basically what i had in mind
_________________
|
Leonide
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: October 01, 2005
Posts: 1553
From: Newport News, Virginia
| Posted: 2007-06-19 00:32
i like that. 250+ for a dread is stupidly high.
_________________
captain of the ICC Assault Cruiser C.S.S. Sledgehammer
|
Captain Splendid
1st Rear Admiral
Joined: January 01, 2007
Posts: 119
| Posted: 2007-06-19 01:36
I think before it was something like 60 for a cruiser.
One of the reasons why some people left was that in 483 prestige gain became a much more slippery slope, i.e. one death in a mid-sized ship could undo a fair amount of pres gained in a day.
Everyone dies in ships, so I don't think players should be punished too harshly for when it happens, as a higher loss per ship simply tends to discourage people from enaging in the first place. It's harder to have fun if you spend most of the time worrying what's going to happen to your stats.
That doesn't mean people should be wreckless and think they can lose ship after ship by doing something foolish (e.g. jumping into the middle of an enemy fleet alone) without losing anything, so some loss should remain. If anything, I think it would be better if the time lost in getting a new ship, spawning from a SY (which in 484 I think will be far less numerous) and travelling back into the fight was the bigger inconvenience.
_________________
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2007-06-19 06:39
We'll see - it all depends on their usefulness.
If their chance of surviving is high and their chances of getting positive prestige are too, we'll yank up the prestige loss, or not, it'll likely stay low.
Me and Drafell both agree that 1.483 prestige loss on death is far too high. You shouldn't be losing a days, if not that, a weeks worth of work with one death.
_________________
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2007-06-19 07:52
Ill have to agree with the above.. one of the more prominent reasons why people jump out before hull is even scratched (and why dictors are hated so much). It makes it hard to keep any combat going if everyone runs away the moment they get hurt a little.
Personally, .482 prestige loss and before was perfect. Dieing wasn't that big of a deal and infact the biggest irritation was remodding and getting back to the fight. You could afford to stay around because you didn't lose so much you couldn't regain is back in a couple of good fights.
I dont think they'll ever be that low again though, however, I do want to point this out. If you increase the prestige loss of ships, you'll get more people unhappy than happy. Most would probably rather prestige harder to get than for it to be any higher.
Also, if you choose to make prestige loss for bigger ships higher, I hope that they are worth every point. Otherwise everyone will likely just stick to cruisers or lower as they are now. No one is going to fly a dread or a station that a single cruiser could knock off.
-Ent
_________________
|
Drafell
Grand Admiral
Mythica
Joined: May 30, 2003
Posts: 2449
From: United Kingdom
| Posted: 2007-06-19 12:55
It is most likely that we will not be changing anything in regards to prestige loss in 1.484 as most of the current changes will already have a significant impact on the overall loss/gain equation. It is currently projected that due to these innate changes, prestige loss itself will be reduced and combat/supply prestige will be much more readily available. Adversely, bombing prestige will be much harder to gain.
_________________
It's gone now, no longer here...Yet still I see, and still I fear.rnrn
rnrn
DarkSpace Developer - Retired
|
Leonide
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: October 01, 2005
Posts: 1553
From: Newport News, Virginia
| Posted: 2007-06-19 13:43
god i hope so.
_________________
captain of the ICC Assault Cruiser C.S.S. Sledgehammer
|
Lithium
Chief Marshal
Joined: June 29, 2003
Posts: 109
| Posted: 2007-06-19 19:37
Losing the ship is a part of the game.
The people should not lose whole daily pres for a death.
station death = 30 minutes building or resupplying
dread death = 25 minutes building or resupplying
cruiser death = 20 minutes building or resupplying
destroyer death = 15 minutes building or resupplying
frigate death = 10 minutes building or resupplying
scout death = 5 minutes building or resupplying
These are necessary loss IMO.
_________________
|
Smartin
Grand Admiral
Joined: August 04, 2005
Posts: 1107
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2007-06-19 22:44
Quote:
|
On 2007-06-19 19:37, Lithium wrote:
Losing the ship is a part of the game.
The people should not lose whole daily pres for a death.
station death = 30 minutes building or resupplying
dread death = 25 minutes building or resupplying
cruiser death = 20 minutes building or resupplying
destroyer death = 15 minutes building or resupplying
frigate death = 10 minutes building or resupplying
scout death = 5 minutes building or resupplying
These are necessary loss IMO.
|
|
I think it would be hard to base ship lost on a time scale. What if their aren't any ships that need sup or their are multiple sups. It would throw everything off.
As far as building goes. I've built a few planets and I know for a fact on a normal terran planet that it takes roughly 1hr to build def 3(1 structure at a time) after you get population and tech up. To say build for 30 minutes and your station death is removed would mean stations would costly roughly 50 prestige per death granted you can find a planet with tech and pop.
I do agree however the prestige loss is way to high in .483. After hearing what the devs have to say we will need to test beta to really see if the blalancing of it all really levels everything out.
_________________
DarkSpace Community Website
|
Supertrooper
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: March 18, 2004
Posts: 1895
From: Maryland, U.S.A
| Posted: 2007-06-20 03:18
I personaly think Prestige loss is fine.
Then again, I'm never really one to care about loosing it.
If it high enough to make it to where SDing and loosing ships wasnt a big penalty, then it'd be fine.
If it was too low, I could see a few people, probably myself, jumping into situations with stations and SDing them..
_________________
|
GothThug {C?}
Fleet Admiral
Joined: June 29, 2005
Posts: 2932
| Posted: 2007-06-20 06:36
isnt that what got this High prestige loss thing implimented in the first place? goin into battle and SDing station after station, suicide Runs, uh...yeah...im sure some of us have learned our lessons and wont do this again..me included...i just want prestige lowered by a fair bit so some of us wont have to work hard at getting a days worth of prestige when in battle you lose it again...it becomes tiresome
_________________
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2007-06-20 07:42
Quote:
|
On 2007-06-20 06:36, Twisted GothThug {C?} wrote:
blah blah
|
|
Some people won't have though. We need a way to stop people pulling a ruff 24/7.
_________________
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2007-06-20 12:34
...Increase the pres cost of a self-destruct?
Alternatively, remove the self-destruct button from the game. It serves virtually no purpose except to deny the enemy prestige and offset your pres loss from death by an often insignificant amount.
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
Fattierob
Vice Admiral
Joined: April 25, 2003
Posts: 4059
| Posted: 2007-06-20 16:58
Quote:
|
On 2007-06-20 12:34, Gejaheline wrote:
...Increase the pres cost of a self-destruct?
Alternatively, remove the self-destruct button from the game. It serves virtually no purpose except to deny the enemy prestige and offset your pres loss from death by an often insignificant amount.
|
|
I self-destruct when I feel like it. FIrst you remember my ability to jump with a red line! now you remove my ability to go sucidial! Next you'll tell me I can't collect Sundanium ore! yeesh.
In all seriousness, self-destructing should be a carefully excuted way of making your ships explosion do some last dammage. Like a ship self destructing would do more damage in shockwave then a ship just dying.
mm, maybe make it so, you hit ctr+d, you get a 10 second timer of "oops", and then after that timer, you hit ctrl+d again to self destruct. the more time you wait to self-destruct, the more damage it does, up to a point. once you're in that mode, you can't change your ships heading or activate any weapons.
_________________
|
Captain Splendid
1st Rear Admiral
Joined: January 01, 2007
Posts: 119
| Posted: 2007-06-21 01:01
Any damage from SD should be negligable, it's far too open to abuse otherwise.
To make players realise this, the sound effect should reflect the damage caused.
A squeaky toy would be perfect.
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
