| Author |
Darkspace Balance |
Jar Jar Binks
Grand Admiral
Joined: December 25, 2001
Posts: 556
|  Posted: 2009-11-27 11:31
Quote:
|
On 2009-09-29 06:13, Azreal wrote:
Uh. No. We are trying to WIN it. But because the server resets are no more, that sense is totally lost on most of the players now.
|
|
why try to "win"? there is and has never been a point in doing so in MV. you dont get any bonus prestige, you dont get any enhancements or anything else that aknowlege(sp?) your "feat".
wich is also why MV is so unpopular and quite frankly, plain boring. in scenarios you get something from a win in terms of bonus prestige, in MV all you get is....... nothing.
MV needs to have a goal similar to scenarios, just MUCH better rewards because it takes that much longer to win.
ofc, this would mean that we REALLY have to get rid of the faction jumping and impose atleast a 1 hour timer to switch sides to prevent ppl from switching back and forth to whatever faction is winning. and either way that is something that should be looked upon. heck i wouldn't mind a permanent thing like the fleets have, as in you pick a side and stick to it or delete and reroll.
i suggested the cooldown to Jbud a while ago but i never heard anything about it after that when i asked.
i mean comon, all we have now is the bragging rights, and noone really cares about that.
_________________
|
darkcow300
Fleet Admiral
Joined: August 14, 2007
Posts: 10
| Posted: 2009-11-27 12:47
I say briliant I love the way you but things if ds should go with what you wrote I'd be playing 24 hours a day. I think the game would do great with that and more advertisement. In no time the community would be bigger than ever
_________________
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2009-11-27 16:52
IM with AZ here in that snuffing out the MV is a big big mistake. i personaly dont give two snips about the scenario. i worked hard enuff for my rank to be trying to build a SY for two hours befor i get to do what i love. FIGHT!!!
so yea no more MV means no mor me for sure!
I do love the idea of missions in MV or an order to what u have to do to move into the next system.
remember guys they are working on missions and grouping systems in the alpha.
Hold your horses untill we see what this new aspect of gameplay yeild.
AND FOR CRIST SAKE!!! DO NOT TRY TO HATCHIT THW MV!!!!!!!!
its been a long frustrating road for me to learn how to fight kluth... and now i can i love it!.
i dont like the idea of building my arse off on a planet only to have it tranny rushed by a bunch of noobs. after 20 mins... absalutly nothing i can do at that point.
I dont like not having my moded ships..
I WORKED HARD ON THOSE!!!!!!
and having no ai to go blow steam off on every now and again is no good either.
I use the ai to get used to my new ships befor i bring em to bare on players.
Also nurfing the Kluth or building up the ICC any more at this point will create a huge imbalance in the game.
i believe were all good where were at now. Have only played wiht HC AC and MD since the change tho.. so smaller ships may still have problems
[ This Message was edited by: FaTaL Defiance on 2009-11-27 16:57 ]
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
Pakhos[+R]
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: May 31, 2002
Posts: 1352
From: Clean room lab
| Posted: 2009-11-27 16:57
Too many heads, too many opinions.
First of all, the basic is same as before. You need resources to spawn a ship. When you have the resources you can spawn anyship ,first from the sy , then any place in mv incluiding jumpgates spawn points. Shipyard issue can be resolve by addind extra 30 minutes to scenario servers. This game isnt all about combat . People need to play as a team ,you have to cap,gather resources and build something. As rewards of building you can get better ships.
Scenario servers are good, but cant handle big number of people. Thats why mv is devided to different servers. They all acts like scenario servers ,only difference is there are no timer.Have to agree on mv goal. This was addressed before. I dont remember who , but someone said there was going be the a story line and missions. Bring back mission as soon as posible and there will be no one caring about scenario servers. Also grouping must be added back to help newbies to get easy prestige instead of pulling them into fast combat servers(aka scenario).
This is one part of what is all about mv. But I, personaly, realy dont like to fly same ships over and over again. To fix this, you must allow faction modding (limited with faction tech) or simply create new kind of weapons, armor ,shields,beams, engines, torps,missiles... As once i said on this same forum, there is no such a thing like nurfing modding. Soon or late you will have to implement the modding 
_________________
* Josef hands [PB]Quantium the Golden GothThug award for best melodrama in a miniseries...
[-GTN-]BackSlash: "Azreal is a master of showing me what is horribly broken in the game."
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2009-11-27 18:33
[quote]
On 2009-11-27 16:57, Pakhos wrote:
Too many heads, too many opinions.
So your saying in something like this all of us are not intitled to our opinions?
then who is qualified to give opinion here? and who the hell is fit to judge that.
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
MrSparkle
Marshal
Joined: August 13, 2001
Posts: 1912
From: mrsparkle
| Posted: 2009-11-27 19:22
Quote:
|
On 2009-11-27 10:37, Azreal wrote:
Would it be capped overnight? Um. Isn't it capped overnight to an Aussie right now? It is the fact that the game is international that it will ALWAYS be possible for some person identified as (you) to wake up and find the server reset or whatever overnight.
So What. Is it better waking up and seeing it all red and having to grind out a system again? It'll be reset....um...that is better....right...?
If you fall in the catagory of "doesn't play in the MV", then honestly I dont see wth you would care what happened there anyways.
But I would only say that if I were being honest.
Oops.
|
|
It's the very fact that it's international that makes it not wise for the MV to be winnable. People are going to be capping and winning when the opposition has logged off for the night. That's a major problem with MMOs with a dynamic world shaped by the players, like DAOC and Shadowbane (the only two I've played with dynamic worlds). It gets to a point where players purposely wait for the opposition to log off, or in DAOC they schedule "alarm clock raids" where they wake up at 3am to do a relic raid, when the enemy is asleep and success is guaranteed.
A winnable MV with such a small playerbase, when certain factions cannot muster enough people to defend at certain times of the day, is a bad idea. It's bad enough that 1 or 2 people can cap the entire Sag server in one night. If the MV is also winnable just imagine the frustration. If we had enough players where every faction had a good playerbase at all hours of the day, it might be worth it. But not now.
_________________
|
Pakhos[+R]
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: May 31, 2002
Posts: 1352
From: Clean room lab
| Posted: 2009-11-27 21:16
[quote]
On 2009-11-27 18:33, FaTaL Defiance wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2009-11-27 16:57, Pakhos wrote:
Too many heads, too many opinions.
So your saying in something like this all of us are not intitled to our opinions?
then who is qualified to give opinion here? and who the hell is fit to judge that.
|
|
You are misunderstanding the facts of DS community . If i go and say "I dont like scenario servers , i wont play while enemy flies dico,bla bla bla bla " then dev wont even bother to read. Be constructive about ideas. If you dont like something tell why and explain a way to improve it . Nobody , specialy faustus will never remove a single code from this game if you consider his precious time he spent to wrote it .
Anyway you are welcome to express your opinion but dont wait it to be heard and considered by who the hell should consider it.
_________________
* Josef hands [PB]Quantium the Golden GothThug award for best melodrama in a miniseries...
[-GTN-]BackSlash: "Azreal is a master of showing me what is horribly broken in the game."
|
Tiffy Rando
Grand Admiral
Joined: January 19, 2003
Posts: 354
From: Austin, Texas
| Posted: 2009-11-28 11:33
Just a small thought. I'm sure this has been brought up a million times, but one of the things that made smaller ships worth using (in ye olde days) was that their weapons were the same as those on larger ships.
Only that larger ships had more of them, which smaller ships compensated for by being fast...
Having these tiny piddly pea shooters on a scout, that can only hurt other scouts which no one flies doesn't make anyone want to fly scouts.
Dunno if I'm out of date on this but I saw someone mention gadget levels and thought I'd throw in my 2 cents.
_________________
Flagship: MCC-717: C.S.S Antaeus
|
Azreal
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 14, 2004
Posts: 2816
From: United State of Texas, Houston
| Posted: 2009-11-28 12:10
Yep. Thats a nasty .483 change if I remember right.
Used to be balance was achieved by tweaking the number of slots.
_________________
bucket link
|
MrSparkle
Marshal
Joined: August 13, 2001
Posts: 1912
From: mrsparkle
| Posted: 2009-11-28 12:47
Quote:
|
On 2009-11-28 11:33, Tiffy Rando wrote:
Just a small thought. I'm sure this has been brought up a million times, but one of the things that made smaller ships worth using (in ye olde days) was that their weapons were the same as those on larger ships.
Only that larger ships had more of them, which smaller ships compensated for by being fast...
Having these tiny piddly pea shooters on a scout, that can only hurt other scouts which no one flies doesn't make anyone want to fly scouts.
Dunno if I'm out of date on this but I saw someone mention gadget levels and thought I'd throw in my 2 cents.
|
|
I've been saying that too, but the philosophy is that a smaller ship should never defeat a dread. I too think that a bigger ship's advantage should be in the number of weapons, not both the number and the strength of weapons.
_________________
|
Drafell
Grand Admiral
Mythica
Joined: May 30, 2003
Posts: 2449
From: United Kingdom
| Posted: 2009-11-28 14:46
A few example gadgets. Approximate values only.
Particle Cannon
Ship > DPM vs Scout > DPM vs Destroyer > DPM vs Dreadnought
Scout (Level 2) > 20350 > 30950 > 41550
Destroyer (Level 4) > 19800 > 30450 > 41100
Dreadnought (Level 6) > 18200 > 28350 > 38500
Railgun
Ship > DPM vs Scout > DPM vs Destroyer > DPM vs Dreadnought
Scout (Level 2) > 19150 > 29550 > 40000
Destroyer (Level 4) > 19100 > 29550 > 39950
Dreadnought (Level 6) > 18000 > 27800 > 37550
So what is this about Dreadnought weapons being stronger?
*DPM is a synthetic result representing average damage per minute against that target type during combat.
[ This Message was edited by: Drafell on 2009-11-28 14:50 ]
_________________
It's gone now, no longer here...Yet still I see, and still I fear.rnrn
rnrn
DarkSpace Developer - Retired
|
Azreal
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 14, 2004
Posts: 2816
From: United State of Texas, Houston
| Posted: 2009-11-28 16:10
Quote:
|
On 2009-11-28 14:46, Drafell wrote:
A few example gadgets. Approximate values only.
Particle Cannon
Ship > DPM vs Scout > DPM vs Destroyer > DPM vs Dreadnought
Scout (Level 2) > 20350 > 30950 > 41550
Destroyer (Level 4) > 19800 > 30450 > 41100
Dreadnought (Level 6) > 18200 > 28350 > 38500
Railgun
Ship > DPM vs Scout > DPM vs Destroyer > DPM vs Dreadnought
Scout (Level 2) > 19150 > 29550 > 40000
Destroyer (Level 4) > 19100 > 29550 > 39950
Dreadnought (Level 6) > 18000 > 27800 > 37550
So what is this about Dreadnought weapons being stronger?
*DPM is a synthetic result representing average damage per minute against that target type during combat.
|
|
Are you saying weapons scale down to the ship class its firing against? And that they scale up vs ship class?
_________________
bucket link
|
Drafell
Grand Admiral
Mythica
Joined: May 30, 2003
Posts: 2449
From: United Kingdom
| Posted: 2009-11-28 16:52
No, I am saying that is the predicted DPS based on the predicted hit rate for that weapon. It's used primarily for comparison, but gives an indication of relative weapon strength.
To explain: Although each projectile from a lvl 6 cannon is more powerful than that of a lvl 2, they have a reduced rate of fire and projectile velocity, with increased range. Purely comparing damage, they do slightly less actual DPS. Comparing hit rate, they hit much less. A dread fitted with lvl 2 cannons instead of lvl 6 while firing at a destroyer would actually do more aggregate damage due to accuracy and fire rate than a dread fitted with lvl 6's...
The calculations are little more complex than this, but hopefully this should give you an idea.
_________________
It's gone now, no longer here...Yet still I see, and still I fear.rnrn
rnrn
DarkSpace Developer - Retired
|
Sens [R33]
Admiral
Joined: September 27, 2008
Posts: 1020
From: Edge of th...
| Posted: 2009-11-28 17:52
Quote:
|
On 2009-11-27 11:31, Jar Jar Binks wrote:
ofc, this would mean that we REALLY have to get rid of the faction jumping and impose atleast a 1 hour timer to switch sides to prevent ppl from switching back and forth to whatever faction is winning. and either way that is something that should be looked upon. heck i wouldn't mind a permanent thing like the fleets have, as in you pick a side and stick to it or delete and reroll.
|
|
-snip-
I personally always hop to the side with less players...
_________________
Proud member of the Order of the Gaifen
Founder and former Club chair of the Shigernafy Fan Club
Co-founder of the Doran Judication Comittee
|
MrSparkle
Marshal
Joined: August 13, 2001
Posts: 1912
From: mrsparkle
| Posted: 2009-11-28 18:42
Quote:
|
On 2009-11-28 16:52, Drafell wrote:
A dread fitted with lvl 2 cannons instead of lvl 6 while firing at a destroyer would actually do more aggregate damage due to accuracy and fire rate than a dread fitted with lvl 6's...
The calculations are little more complex than this, but hopefully this should give you an idea.
|
|
Wait, lower level weapons are more accurate? Is that a result of the speed of the projectiles only, or is it because they have an actual accuracy value?
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
