Nislar

how about this. attackers would automatically retreat in certain hours. like 12 or 24 hours after yo ...
barbily Posted at 2012-2-2 19:48

Perhaps if something like.. within those 12 or 24 hours, you were not expelled by the player, when you have to forcibly leave him, they are unable to attack any player owned objects for say, 12 hours. To prevent them from getting mad and killing off your nodes out of spite.  I strongly feel players captured colonies shouldn't be able to do any form of pvp while garrison'd by a enemy, be it hitting forms, colonies, or players nodes.  Free nodes sure. along with the other stuff like a fort that's not currently owned.

Nislar

Something I forgot to mention, but I think it should be added badly. When a player goes to expel another from his colony. perhaps a one hour wait timer before the battle starts. It would prevent single shuttle expel spamming to slowly dwindle off ships, not completely, but right now I find it.. well, horrible game play. Along with making the expel happen a hour after it is initiated, you would give the person capturing it a notice of when the battle would happen, and they have a one hour window to get ready to be there. Perhaps no new fleets added during the time till expel over. Lots of different variations that could happen. Anyone feel the same way or have a take on it?

LatexIdo

That's a good idea Nislar... Maybe not a time to "start battle" but a timer "between battles" ? But if you go to sleep, it could mean your fleet annihilation...

@ Barbily : I think transfering fleet to other colony while assaulted is not a problem, it's really raiding the nodes that is. If player can transfer fleet, he can group his forces or at least make his commanders escape.

You've got something with the timer thing. IF it's not that easy to expel a fleet, AND something happen at the end of the occupation timer just like the occupation timer on space fortress, the timer idea could solve some issues.
It could be the way to protect your alliances nodes from raid, just like fortress hold protect colonies... Maybe a 12 hours occupying protect nodes for 36 hours... Something like that... That way, you can give permission to attack nodes while assaulted as a guerilla warfare to cut the enemy's supply routes.

GKZhukov

Reply 13# barbily


@ Barbily - So turn the Lance Bases off during expulsion. End to Shuttle/Lance Base Spam. I'm also wondering if Defending Fleets (in any situation) should take less or even no power loss. Being forced out of somewhere by energy loss when you're off-line isn't that great. Worse if half your forces get shop up, but the other half don't even get to kill stuff in return, just because of Energy degradation. I think the energy system is really good for limiting an attacker, but when you're defending a fort/colony/node when offline it can get spammed too easily.

I think the 12/24 hr auto-expulsion (with a 1 hr cd before re-attacking) could be a good solution if you're that worried about occupations. Expelling still isn't *that* hard though. You know the enemy fleet's composition, you launch to deal with it. You can still launch from other bases. You still have Alliance Mates to Expel for you (a list of occupied colonies in Alliance Interface would help this)

@ the new guy and Barbily again - In terms of noobs the real problem is there's no reward/penalty system based on who you attack. I've suggested before that there be some sort of battle tracking system. Points awarded for successes and deducted for failures. The points gained/lost would be relative to the points of your opponent (like a Chess/ELO system or one used by several MMOs out there). This would make it counter-productive to attack Players significantly outside of your threat-range. It could even be used to effect Raid resources etc.

PVP Shield - This is still bust as heck. Currently all our Forts are being hit by someone hiding under a PVP Shield. Can't be retaliated against. Have the Devs actually played the game? A good Dev team has to theorycraft, play-test and physically be playing the game they are making. Merely doing the first never ends well. I love the ideas, but the execution still suggests some serious blind spots that anyone playing could tell you about immediately.

GKZhukov

The biggest concern you have right now is the feeling if total futility that a lot of players experience.

This is a concern for both new guys and top level players (in different ways). I appreciate your worry that new guys could feel helpless if a big guy sits on their colony and this could drive them away. And I agree you should protect new people to a sensible degree (or as suggested make the gains less worthwhile when a big guys goes after a small guy).

But please appreciate that a large portion of your high level player-base also feels helpless in a number of scenarios such as vs. PvP shield abusers, vs. Shuttle Spam abusers, vs. Serial Node Raiders, vs. Lance Base Spam, vs. Battleships etc.

You're in serious risk of losing a lot of high level players (and have lost many already) for exactly that reason. Everybody (or most people) can accept being beaten, heck I respect it from a player who's out-thought me, and just accept it from a player that's bigger than me (as long as the game doesn't encourage a big guy beating on small guy mentality, and part of the beauty of this game is a small guy can still beat a big guy due to better designs and fleet composition, something many similar games don't offer).

What people don't like is where imbalance or game mechanics prevent you from doing anything constructive about it. Players aren't being beaten by better players, they are being beaten by flawed game mechanics. This is what causes people to leave...

Danino

I like SS cuz it's a good "Role Game". Specifically: the rules making the game are a good compromice\equilibrium between gameplay and realism.

so please whatever changin u going to make, try to do not invent too many "accomodative" changin for this n these reasons.

reading previous replies, i like what GKZ says about lance bases: after u been assaulted, defensive systems would be disabled.
Infact, from a Role-Point of view, if i was the attacker, after have conquered a colony, i would immediatly  "disable" any defensive systems (like towers or shields)

Please do not forget there is a nasty bug limiting the Pvp in this game that should be correctly as speed as possible because it limit the game play:  the "timer" between rounds in battle.
example: It happens often when you click "next", the battle already started.
This bug can be tollerated in a pve scenario, but it would cause a disaster in a war-server scenario. You can imagine it.

LatexIdo

Danino, the bug you speak is not one I think... it's a game mechanics to make the battle be shorter.

But I had  lost ships that way to and it's annoying. Maybe raise the cooldown for the first round of battle to 30 sec ?

GKZhukov

The bug is with the syncing of the timer.

It's out of sync with the graphics so you often lose several seconds off the timer whilst you're still watching the previous round.

In cases where you fight more than one set of fleets the timer for the second battle begins the moment the server has processed the final round of the previous battle (which is almost exactly when you select your orders for that round). However it will then continue to show the shots and explosions (potentially up to 8 with Battle Cruisers and Aircraft present). It will then show you the results screen and you have to click next fight to continue. The whole while the timer on the new battle is running down. Sometimes you enter the new battle and have missed the entire 15 seconds of decision making. That's the bug.

barbily

Reply 19# GKZhukov


    yea. we shall concern the situation of all players in this War. but i believe lance base is a kind of strategy in war game. we have to give some advantages to defenders. if he cannot raid, gain resources, send fleets, use lance base... if he could not do everything.. then what is the next plan for him if he is occupied by attackers?

admin

I want to play tower defense