| Author |
Prestige gain rate |
Kaepora
Fleet Admiral
Joined: February 08, 2011
Posts: 77
|  Posted: 2011-02-17 23:06
Quote:
|
On 2011-02-17 18:25, jamesbob wrote:
humorious intention what humorious intention i was being dead serious.
and chloro this is not the first time you suggested something simmlar only to have it shot down.
you keep going way to big in your suggestion of changes their fore they rarely get considered (unless someone is trolling)
baby steps please baby steps.
|
|
I swear somewhere in that comment is a sentence in english that makes some sort of sense.
But I'd have to go with Kenny's idea. Once cruisers get redone, it'll be all the more attractive (That way you can actually do damage, instead of now which is take potshots then cower in fear when the dread point jumps you.)
_________________
|
SpaceAdmiral
Grand Admiral
Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 1005
| Posted: 2011-02-18 00:48
Quote:
|
On 2011-02-17 23:06, Kaepora wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2011-02-17 18:25, jamesbob wrote:
humorious intention what humorious intention i was being dead serious.
and chloro this is not the first time you suggested something simmlar only to have it shot down.
you keep going way to big in your suggestion of changes their fore they rarely get considered (unless someone is trolling)
baby steps please baby steps.
|
|
I swear somewhere in that comment is a sentence in english that makes some sort of sense.
But I'd have to go with Kenny's idea. Once cruisers get redone, it'll be all the more attractive (That way you can actually do damage, instead of now which is take potshots then cower in fear when the dread point jumps you.)
|
|
The heavy cruiser is funny though, engage enemy at max range and see the fall-off pcannons do little damage. Kite them and see comments about "Fighting like a man."
_________________
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2011-02-18 05:19
Quote:
|
On 2011-02-17 11:49, Fleet Admiral Maxwell House wrote:
So i just made some calculations to look up how much time it could take.
If we say for vice Admiral 25 000 (I removed 500 pres to be able to calculate better)
We take the best minimal value per hour which is 500 pres an hour. Which is high like you said. If someone plays 5 hour a day, he will make around 2500 pres a day. So after 10 days of intense gaming and everything, he will be vice admiral. This is, if he plays 5 hour per day, and make 500 pres an hour. Somehow, I doub't anyone lower then VA could make 500 pres an hour especially in these times. I don't think that increasing the pres for the ranks is the idea. I just made it the FA (Which took me some time) and I'll be back to where i was before (Admiral) which is not a big lose but still.
I think the problem is not that. Like some said above, se should instead, reduce the prestige gain from the hull instead of armor/shield. I don't make a lot of prestige from hurting someone's shields or armor. It's the hull. Whenever you rank up, you get a better ship (or not) and do more damage which gives you more prestige. So as time goes up and your rank, your prestige gain too. So it's easier to make prestige as you rank up.
We should only lower the prestige gain from the hull and let it the same for armor/shields so the newbies can get some prestige.
And I think we should too, add more prestige loss from deaths. I remember when i started to play, even dying with a small ship would make me go mad. Nowadays people don't care about dying even in stations. Stations are supposed to be massive, and almost unkillable and have a gigantic crew inside of them. So people would just go there and blow up themself with all the crew? I'm not sure but stations probably have around 1500-2000 crew member? You'd really follow your captain if he was saying:
"Hey folks! Let's go blow ourself on that dread! Will be funny!"
I don't remember who said it but 1000 pres loss from a station death seems to be right for me. I've died maybe once or twice with my station and even if I the pres lost was implanted, i would still have made some significiant pres. (Yeah I try to die not often. A habit from the old times)
PS: Oh and PLEASE!!!!! Fix the damn Inf Stack bug! Really annoying when trying to bomb and the stack is just stuck there until someone sends a inf.
|
|
500 prestige an hour in a dread is a very low estimate. Thats like, not even hitting spacebar estimate.
1k prestige an hour without trying. I've gotten 10k prestige with 5 hours of work. Its not difficult with a little effort, but for the sake of argument you take a newbie and throw him in a dreadnaught.
Oh wait, why would you? This is a big huge powerful ship. It should be worth alot for what you can do potentially with it.
So newbie lugs out this huge ship and dies and likely gets demoted. What does he learn?
He learns that taking out the biggest ship for every enounter isnt always the best idea, and he also learns that maybe he isn't quite ready to lose 500 prestige if he dies.
Increasing prestige loss while keeping the reward as it is now, the same hits several birds with just one rock. It removes dread/station spam. It keeps people from throwing away their ships regardless of their prestige. It brings current prestige back in line so people who just abused the hell out of this gain rate currently get dropped back down to normal levels. It puts something more back into the equation than just jumping and hitting spacebar. And most importantly, it doesn't remove the potential reward.
It means the people who earn those dreads use them well. We can't afford to baby people in a PvP game, especially when you're up there in the GA range. Yes, I heard you, you earned you rank. Now earn the right to keep it.
Yeah you earned the requirment to fly a ship. but do you have the ability. Lets find out. Lets put real risk into the game.
Not for newbies, they have enough risk as it is. Lets not just raise the cap higher because it can just be grinded to just as fast. Not to mention pissing off a ton of people.
Increasing prestige loss doesn't make any ship worthless. No layouts are changed. Gain rate hasn't been nerfed. The only thing that happened is you're flying a ship worth its weight in prestige if you choose to fly it.
I think thats a sensible thing to do.
-Ent
_________________
|
SpaceAdmiral
Grand Admiral
Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 1005
| Posted: 2011-02-18 06:05
The bad part about upping pres loss is:
Scared to do combat.
We already have faction hoppers and people who jump after they think it is safe (we've all probably have had this phase when we first start the game). High pres loss will make some people just stop fighting in fear of losing the ship.
_________________
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2011-02-18 07:39
Quote:
|
On 2011-02-18 06:05, SpaceAdmiral wrote:
The bad part about upping pres loss is:
Scared to do combat.
We already have faction hoppers and people who jump after they think it is safe (we've all probably have had this phase when we first start the game). High pres loss will make some people just stop fighting in fear of losing the ship.
|
|
Then what, we're supposed to make it completely safe? What kind of game is that?
People won't stop fighting combat. They'll just stop flying big ships they can't afford to lose. Why fly a Battle Station into a fleet of enemies? Exactly. You won't because its stupid, wasteful, and 3k prestige loss sucks.
Why would they then? Because big ships are so much stronger than smaller ones, that in the right hands they are huge breadwinners. People have certainly forgotten the 30 some odd other ships at their disposal, because in this age of DS people have forgotten that rank does not = skill, and rank does not mean more powerful.
Small ships are effective, much cheaper prestige wise, and incidentally, actually fun to use. People just don't becaues compared to Dreads, and Stations, there is no comparison - jumping in and suiciding is easily more profitable.
The argument that the lack of "safety" promotes combat is not only ironic, but only true because if there is a huge reward but no risk, of course people are going to flock to doing just that one thing. See: Constantly spamming dreads and stations at each and not caring if they lose one.
So should we have a game that has no risk just so that we can keep throwing big ships at each other in own little sandbox of 40 players, or actually have some kind of meaningful play experience?
I mean if the vast majority of players want their hands held and told they can always be safe because no matter what you wont lose anything, and thats the direction DS wants to go because you're afraid to lose the ten veteran players that absolutely must fly the highest ranked ship they can, then all very well. But I'm going to still say thats completely counter to what a PvP game is supposed to be, and even more against what DS was built upon.
Pick one of the following, because they are mutually exclusive. If you can't, and you want to blatantly ignore the whole point of what risk vs. reward provides in an online MMO, then the argument is up.
Either:
You have high prestige gain and low prestige loss, you get lots of big ships fighting each other for six months over the same rock farming prestige off of one another.
Or
You have high prestige gain and high prestige loss, and people who are good in big ships will still fly them, still make the same kind of prestige but with much more risk, no more flying into a cluster of enemies blindly. And the people who aren't good with them should probably stick to lower ranked ships.
And I can't see a feasible argument for making Dreads and Stations easy to fly. Hell, smaller ships are harder to fly than them currently. You're a high ranked player, you've played for months or years, if you aren't a good pilot that alone should disqualify you from reaching that rank, but you can grind up to it. But high rank doesn't = high skill.
People are sometimes confused as to what DS is primarily about, and its about Player vs. Player combat. Yes, there are PvE elements but they all support PvP at the top of the pyramid.
If you're going to have a PvP game, then you need to have a PvP leveling system. Otherwise you get all kinds of bad mechanics and balance (like we're seeing now). This unfortunately means those without the ability won't reach the top, unlike in WoW where every person can reach max level in three days. WoW is primarily a PvE game, therefore, everyone gets to be ranked at the top regardless of ability.
In a game like DS, our leveling system allows for both positive and negative gain, true to its PvP homage. The problem is, theres too much gain, not enough loss. And the biggest culprits are when you hit Admiral.
Is it elitist? Hell yes it is. The casual player has no business flying a large and expensive ship unless they know how, (and interestingly enough, since they take more time to rank up, actually do, since smaller ships take more ability to use), and hardcore players don't either unless they have the ability too. The entire balance of DS is based on bigger ships being rare. There have been millions of ideas thrown around how it should work itself out.
This is the best way. No, not everyone gets to eat cake, no not everyone gets to be at the top, but thats what a PvP game is, its a ranked playerbase based entirely around the playerbase, not limits just defined by the game. The vast majority of prestige you will ever game will come from other people, not mobs. I think its fair to say that getting demoted should be just as reasonable a proposition as getting promoted.
Will it make everyone happy? No, the people with little ability with big ships will cry they can't use their huge toys because its too risky for them, the people who farm in them every day will hate it because now they have to remember how to dodge in a smaller ship. And the people who can't handle actual risk in a game will go play Maple Story. Which incidentally has more risk than this game. Thats saddening.
But the people who want a real PvP experience will stick around, and the newer players who don't go into a game completely overwhelmed by just vets in big ships will thank you for it, and wont have ranked up in a culture centered around just combat prestige. I think its better for the game and better for its playerbase as a whole.
-Ent
-Ent
_________________
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2011-02-18 07:47
Scared to do combat?
That's srsly lame. Since when was going into combat riskless?
The game shd reflect the risks, and also make the player feel the impact of losing a ship.... especially a capital ship or station. If u can't handle it, fondly a cruiser or supp.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Code Red
Chief Marshal
Non Omnis Moriar
Joined: September 08, 2007
Posts: 184
| Posted: 2011-02-18 08:24
Big ships should equal very big losses when destroyed , there has to be a big risk pres wise when deciding to take a station to balance the potential big gains that can be had in a short space of time.
_________________
Code Red, For winning in the 1RA Fleet Wars event, here's your coupon for a week.
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2011-02-18 10:12
+1
exept k'luth dont die very much...
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
DiepLuc
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 23, 2010
Posts: 1187
| Posted: 2011-02-18 11:18
Quote:
| On 2011-02-17 19:31, SpaceAdmiral wrote:
tl;dr:
Ramping up ranks only temporarily solves the problem. One day, even if it takes 10 years, everyone will be in dreads again. So, your solution would probably be to keep raising it, which discourages the newbie and casual player.
|
|
What more do you want? All games have an ending, MMO is not an exception. When you play the unlimited part, what do you expect?
And please, you guys should stop complaining prestige gain rate is high. . You think prestige loss must be impressive so that dreadspace and station spam vanishes, oh why don't you start it first yourself as a volunteer? Remove support station, combat station/dread, assault dread in your garrage, stays with the cruisers and destroyers, at most command dread. No one force you to fly the dread and station, it's up to your choice. And don't complain you must use the dread because the others do as prestige is earnt personally.
Even if you don't volunteer, when the prestige loss is high, prestige gain is low, then everyone is in cruisers, which means they sacrifice space in garrage for cruisers and destroyers because 8 is the maximum slots. Is fighting in cruisers/destroyers funnier than dreads? Be my guest.
I swear that I never heard an employee say to his boss:
- Don't rise the salary, if you dare, I pay back the surplus money.
- Besides, please rise the fine that I must lose for making any error or doing anything bad.
And here in Darkspace, I'm hearing people asking for what they avoid in real life. I realize Darkspace is such a fictional game!
[ This Message was edited by: chlorophyll on 2011-02-18 11:38 ]
_________________
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2011-02-18 12:04
Quote:
|
On 2011-02-18 11:18, chlorophyll wrote:
What more do you want? All games have an ending, MMO is not an exception. When you play the unlimited part, what do you expect?
And please, you guys should stop complaining prestige gain rate is high. ...
I swear that I never heard an employee say to his boss:
- Don't rise the salary, if you dare, I pay back the surplus money.
- Besides, please rise the fine that I must lose for making any error or doing anything bad.
And here in Darkspace, I'm hearing people asking for what they avoid in real life. I realize Darkspace is such a fictional game!
|
|
Point the first: I have spent, oh, five years or so playing this game, and most of that time was spent at a lesser rank than vice admiral, i.e. using ships smaller than dreadnaughts.
Nowadays people can become chief marshal in a matter of days, in spite of the fact that they cannot initially use dreadnaughts, cruisers, or even destroyers. So presumably sticking to smaller ships would not reduce one's prestige gain rate.
Point the second: You are arguing that people should never request things that make it harder for them to gain ranks, it seems. Extending this to its logical conclusion, the best course of action would be to simply remove prestige and let everyone fly whatever they want. Since there would be no penalties for dying, say hello to stationspace.
Personally, I think something went wrong at some point when hull values and a ship's average damage output increased massively, resulting in the ability to earn huge amounts of prestige. Reducing this (and increasing death penalties, particularly for larger ships) would make people worry a bit more about exploding and being demoted.
Sure, some people could still afford to self-destruct stations for amusement, but eventually their prestige buffers would run out and things would settle down.
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2011-02-18 15:46
Quote:
|
On 2011-02-18 12:04, Gejaheline wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2011-02-18 11:18, chlorophyll wrote:
What more do you want? All games have an ending, MMO is not an exception. When you play the unlimited part, what do you expect?
And please, you guys should stop complaining prestige gain rate is high. ...
I swear that I never heard an employee say to his boss:
- Don't rise the salary, if you dare, I pay back the surplus money.
- Besides, please rise the fine that I must lose for making any error or doing anything bad.
And here in Darkspace, I'm hearing people asking for what they avoid in real life. I realize Darkspace is such a fictional game!
|
|
Point the first: I have spent, oh, five years or so playing this game, and most of that time was spent at a lesser rank than vice admiral, i.e. using ships smaller than dreadnaughts.
Nowadays people can become chief marshal in a matter of days, in spite of the fact that they cannot initially use dreadnaughts, cruisers, or even destroyers. So presumably sticking to smaller ships would not reduce one's prestige gain rate.
Point the second: You are arguing that people should never request things that make it harder for them to gain ranks, it seems. Extending this to its logical conclusion, the best course of action would be to simply remove prestige and let everyone fly whatever they want. Since there would be no penalties for dying, say hello to stationspace.
Personally, I think something went wrong at some point when hull values and a ship's average damage output increased massively, resulting in the ability to earn huge amounts of prestige. Reducing this (and increasing death penalties, particularly for larger ships) would make people worry a bit more about exploding and being demoted.
Sure, some people could still afford to self-destruct stations for amusement, but eventually their prestige buffers would run out and things would settle down.
|
|
Geja made the exact point I was going to.
Just like in a real life job, you don't expect to get paid enormous amounts of money for very little work. Likewise, riskier jobs pay out a hell of alot more than riskless ones. Why? Because people want to be paid more for a bigger risk that they take. It gives value to that currency.
DS's only realy currency is prestige. Right now, its worth pesos when it could be worth dollars. You "spend" that currency everytime you take out a ship, or rather, you put it up as collateral, and in return, you can earn prestige in it as long as you don't lose it.
Bigger ships have a bigger potential than smaller ones to gain prestige faster, but smaller ships can be just as effective if not more so, in numbers when it comes to gaining prestige. You're not risking very much, but you're not going to get much back. Risk. Reward.
DS's "currency" is currently far far inflated to the point where its meaningless, that is, you can literally "throw ships away". And this breaks balance, especially when the ships you throw away are big and powerful. It causes a severe imbalance in the game mechanics because if there is no risk in death then there is no meaning to reward. No meaning to reward, and people won't play at all. Why bother having ranks, or even a currency? Why not just give everyone everything and let them just throw stations at each other at that point? It doesn't make a video game very fun (even in real life if everyone had all the rewards with no risk there would be serious ramifications, but thats a whole nother topic).
Now personally, I don't think you should lower the gain at all. I think the gain is fine, I think that if you fly a big ship, you have the potential to make a huge bit of prestige with it. I also think that if you fly it, you run the risk of losing a ton of prestige too. Its a concept we also call fairness. These are all various mechanics that are all present in every single MMO and hell, every single multiplayer game, so that everyone has fun. Not just the people at the top, not just the people with the most money, everyone.
I've never taken a game design class like Jack, but I know there are three corner elements to every MMO out there that make it succeed. They are Balance, Risk vs. Reward, and Progression. If they don't match up the playerbase dies off.
If there's no balance mechanics, then people only go for one type of class/ship/item whatever. Everyone will go for it, everyone only wants that because its the "best". You don't want "best" in a video game. You want things that are good for certain things, that way you get variety, another good part about video games. You don't want to fly the same ships every day fighting the same other ships every day.
IF theres no risk vs. reward, on either end of the sliding scale, then you get problems too. Too much risk but not enough reward and nobody goes and does that. Too little risk, too high of a reward, you get everyone going for that one thing. Closely tied to Balance. You want the appropriate amount of risk for the appropriate amount of reward, suiting the needs of whatever balance you're trying to achieve (in this case, balance is going for fewer big ships, lots of small ships, just ask a dev - they'll tell you a smaller class of ship needs about 1.5 of itself to match a class of a size bigger than it evenly).
And then you want Progression, and thats different for every game. Progression here is prestige, and ranks, and badges. People want a sense of earning something when they play, even when you're Chief Marshall, you want your actions to count, you want the planets you capture to matter, and you want the ships you lose to not die in vain. It brings value to your own efforts and your own work. Go play Counter Strike if you just want to shoot at things for giggles. In an MMO, your moves are persistent, and they should reflect that. Currently we have tha balance right, just not the right mechanics to keep it in force without forcing limitations, something no Dev wants to do.
The easiest, best, quickest, and most sensible solution is ramp up the loss on dreads and stations and nothing else, and keep gain the same. I would also venture to say to increase armor/shield gain back up to half the original levels just to give the smaller ships their own edge. Its about preserving balance, putting risk back into the reward, and making progression matter again. Then you'll keep the new players that come and yes, some old players might leave just because they can't throw their ships away. But all in all, you'll be better off for it.
If I wanted to make it even fairer, I'd have prestige loss tied to ranks rather than just ships, so that newbies at Admiral aren't hit as hard as a Chief Marshal in the same ship by a large margin (hey if I'm a CM and I die, I should freaking FEEL it.) Demotion should be mechanic in the game, not just a penalty for the first few minutes you get promoted sometimes.
And then, order will be put back right.
-Ent
_________________
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2011-02-18 16:14
500>dread death
1000>station death
imho, a good dread run yeilds 1000 or more press befor you die.
imho a good station run yeilds 1000s of press befor you die.
start there and tweek it up.
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
SpaceAdmiral
Grand Admiral
Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 1005
| Posted: 2011-02-18 17:29
Ramping up pres lose for ships will probably not affect dread spam unless it is outrageously high, people will just jump out before hull damage.
_________________
|
Cory_O
Grand Admiral
Joined: July 15, 2010
Posts: 104
| Posted: 2011-02-18 17:59
Create a modifier to gain more pres in smaller ships and less in larger ships. This would both slow down pres gain in general and encourage people to use smaller ships more often. Combined with an increase in pres loss for dying and i think you would have an effective system to coax people out off their dreads and stations... or not, just a thought.
_________________
I am the monster in your head. I am the phantom under your bed. I am the broken string when youre hanging by a thread. I am the darkness when the light fades away. When the buds of hope begin to sprout I am the harvester.
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2011-02-18 18:07
Ent has, above, basically explained my logic quite fantastically. I shall emphasise a few of the important bits in my opinion. [EDIT] And apparently write a billion paragraphs, also.[/EDIT]
Quote:
|
On 2011-02-18 15:46, Enterprise wrote:
Geja made the exact point I was going to.
DS's "currency" is currently far far inflated to the point where its meaningless, that is, you can literally "throw ships away". And this breaks balance, especially when the ships you throw away are big and powerful. It causes a severe imbalance in the game mechanics because if there is no risk in death then there is no meaning to reward.
|
|
This. Oh so much this. I don't want to hear people saying "lol I SDed a station and gained a billion prestige."
Death should not just be a slap on the wrist. Oh-so-many games (and here I talk about games where you have a persistent character/empire/whatever, not games like counter-strike where you are expected to die, although those still have adverse consequences for death) punish you for dying, sometimes harshly. In Everquest, you would effectively lose experience points. Some similar games actually cause you to lose levels if you die enough times. World of Warcraft causes damage to your equipment, which can be financially crippling if you had nice stuff. Eve Online (dare I mention it) has absolutely no protection for your ship, your equipment, or your experience points should you or your ship get blown up.
And do you know what? That risk of loss is the thing that gets the heart pounding and the adrenaline flowing. People are out to destroy you and your shiny, expensive equipment. You're going to have to pull out every trick in the book to kill them, and they're going to be doing exactly the same back to you.
Even in, say, the Battlefield series, where your team can potentially die hundreds of times before you actually lose, your opponent is going to be trying their hardest to make sure that every skirmish they have with you is going to deplete your reinforcement counter.
If losing has no consequence, then there's not really any fun any more. Fleets explode en masse because the enemy flings kamikaze stations at them. EADs simply charge in and zap away with wild abandon because they can just do it again when they explode. Everyone fields the biggest, baddest thing they can just because they can. The tactics become uninspired and nobody learns to innovate, because crappy tactics that involve dying at the end can just be used over and over until the enemy actually dies.
Quote:
|
Its a concept we also call fairness. These are all various mechanics that are all present in every single MMO and hell, every single multiplayer game, so that everyone has fun. Not just the people at the top, not just the people with the most money, everyone.
|
|
This too. Example: In Battlefield 2142's Titan mode, one player has the privilege of commanding what is essentially a flying battleship, along with a variety of battlefield-shaping weapons and support abilities.
However, should this player go and get their flying battleship blown up, their entire team loses. They can't win alone, because their battleship guns can't kill (although it can damage) the enemy battleship, and conversely their team will have a lot of trouble winning if their battleship is, for example, parked above a missile silo in the middle of the enemy base.
Great power, but great responsibility.
In Darkspace, I remember (when I was a mere noob in a frigate) the privilege of watching a single uber-leet dreadnaught pilot flying into battle alongside flights of cruisers and smaller ships, all of whom both relied on the dread's overwhelming firepower and yet also protected the dread from threats. If the dread died, everyone else would most likely be next, so the dread pilot had both the privilege and the responsibility of being a powerful piece on the field.
Currently, new players are often at a disadvantage because the majority of the enemy fleet will be big, nasty, and will fight to the death and return almost immediately because they have prestige to burn. This makes it very challenging for newbies to learn the ropes because they're both ineffectual and face a steep learning curve against things that kill them relatively easily. If there were some decent "torpedo boats", by which I mean essentially small fast ships specially equipped to be a serious threat to larger ships, things might be a bit different since newbies could both attack and defend larger ships.
Quote:
|
You don't want "best" in a video game. You want things that are good for certain things, that way you get variety...
|
|
Again, this. It's boring fighting with the same things against the same enemies. In DS I rarely think "Okay, I'm flying X, so I should attack Y and look out for Z, taking care to protect W which is a sitting duck for Y, which is what I should be attacking."
I mostly think: "Dreadnaught? Battle cruiser. Station? Torpedo cruiser."
I refer you to Tactical Rock Paper Scissors, which essentially gives an incentive for fielding a balanced force and an incentive for individual players to change tactics once in a while.
Quote:
|
If I wanted to make it even fairer, I'd have prestige loss tied to ranks rather than just ships, so that newbies at Admiral aren't hit as hard as a Chief Marshal in the same ship by a large margin (hey if I'm a CM and I die, I should freaking FEEL it.) Demotion should be mechanic in the game, not just a penalty for the first few minutes you get promoted sometimes.
|
|
Interesting idea. The very principle that a Grand Admiral could lose any ship is surely harder to swallow for High Command than a mere midshipman losing the same ship.
And yes, demotion should always be a real possibility. It's the game's main risk mechanism, after all.
(Some emphasis added.)
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
