| Author |
Grouping Questions |
Danek Ma`arna C`arns
Fleet Admiral
Joined: March 26, 2004
Posts: 102
From: Atlanta
|  Posted: 2009-03-06 12:13
Have the details of this been worked out?
Is grouping a specific command to form up, or are you automatically a group with your fleet?
How does it share? If the fleet is the group, does it only share with people in the same planetary cluster? In the same system? On the same server? Everyone online? Everyone in the fleet, online and offline?
How is the Pres to be awarded? If one ship in the group does 100 pres of ability... does that ship get 100 pres, and everyone else get 100 pres? Does the ship get 100 pres, and everyone else gets 10 pres? Does everyone get 10 pres, if there are ten in the group?
What kind of pres will it be? If I am in the group, and my buddy does 100 combat pres, do I gain combat pres, or does it just add to my total pres?
Is pres loss shared as well?
These decisions have a lot of sway in determining how things play out in the future of DS. If it is the whole fleet, equally divided, and losses are shared... then fleets will be fairly elite organizations, constantly trimming the deadwood... rewarding teamwork and penalizing dumb action.
If the pres gain is equally copied to all, then fleets will devolve into "bigger is better" spaz fleets as everyone races to GA.
If the Pres is just total pres, then you might rapidly advance but lack the badges to use any larger vessel. If it copies the type, then it rewards everyone involved in the bombing and capping... but it pretty much makes the badges pointless relics of earlier times.
_________________
|
Doran
Chief Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 29, 2003
Posts: 4032
From: The Gideon Unit
| Posted: 2009-03-06 12:33
without knowing exactly what mav has planned, you can likely (but not certainly) expect the folowing
players will probably be grouped automatically by fleet, since this puts unfleeters at a disadvantage, there'll likely be a mechanism to group unfleeted players.
group size will probably be restricted somewhat, say in the neighborhood of 8-12 players. this is as much for balance as it is screen space utilization
players receiving shared pres will not get it at 100% value, math's looking closer to (for example) 50% of a player's pres income is split among all the the other players in the group, with some weighting on account of rank.
shared pres will probably per-stat, combat pres shared as combat pres, build pres shared as build pres, etc.
there'll very likely be some sort of proximity and or idle timer in place to reduce the likelyhood of leechers who are too far away from the action or afk or otherwise not helping their team.
pres lost probably wont be shared, and we may end up increasing the res lost for ships again to compensate
_________________
|
Russian Roulette with Muskets
Grand Admiral
Joined: September 04, 2002
Posts: 393
| Posted: 2009-03-06 12:39
Quote:
|
On 2009-03-06 12:33, Doran wrote:
without knowing exactly what mav has planned, you can likely (but not certainly) expect the folowing
players will probably be grouped automatically by fleet, since this puts unfleeters at a disadvantage, there'll likely be a mechanism to group unfleeted players.
group size will probably be restricted somewhat, say in the neighborhood of 8-12 players. this is as much for balance as it is screen space utilization
players receiving shared pres will not get it at 100% value, math's looking closer to (for example) 50% of a player's pres income is split among all the the other players in the group, with some weighting on account of rank.
shared pres will probably per-stat, combat pres shared as combat pres, build pres shared as build pres, etc.
there'll very likely be some sort of proximity and or idle timer in place to reduce the likelyhood of leechers who are too far away from the action or afk or otherwise not helping their team.
pres lost probably wont be shared, and we may end up increasing the res lost for ships again to compensate
|
|
You shouldn't force players to group up by increasing death penaltys that are to be outweighed by group gains.
Rather share the losses in the group, same formula as the gains.
Fair and square: you can gain more, but you can lose more.
Autogrouping fleets members is dubious too, but not realy my concern.
The other apsect i wrote about is.
_________________
- In firepower we trust.
- I'm not buying this!
-we ran out of firepower.
|
mannythepogs
Grand Admiral
Pitch Black
Joined: July 12, 2007
Posts: 140
From: mbllanes
| Posted: 2009-03-06 12:58
Think this is a way to have those unfleeted player to join fleets to get the advantage of the grouping system.
Fleeted players means less faction jumper.
They should also have some penalized system on faction jumper in place. Let says if you change faction in X time in 1 month where X is the number of change Faction you will be penalized by half prestige gain for 1 day, 2 days.. or so on so on or can't join any grouping.
The way i see things... if the other side is winning... x player will transfer to the winning side... if the other side again takes the upper hand, you will see him on that side.
_________________
|
Ham&Swiss
Grand Admiral
Joined: October 12, 2004
Posts: 418
From: 10$ to whoever finds me
| Posted: 2009-03-06 13:38
Quote:
|
On 2009-03-06 12:58, mbllanes - Dark Vader wrote:
Snipit snipit
The way i see things... if the other side is winning... x player will transfer to the winning side... if the other side again takes the upper hand, you will see him on that side.
|
|
Only problem not all fleetless players do this. When I was fleetless, i usually went to the loosing side to even it out, and thus longer combat ensued. In this case, why should i be penalized for making the sides a bit more even?
Think all sides before you speak for everyone.
H&S
_________________
If violence doesn't work, Your not using enough!
|
Russian Roulette with Muskets
Grand Admiral
Joined: September 04, 2002
Posts: 393
| Posted: 2009-03-06 13:40
i've been UGTO like 99% of my time in DS.
So why should i be punished for other people who ENJOY changing their factions to fit their current "needs". Sometimes you wanna play ICC and sometimes you don't.
Wait a minute. Why punish them for it too?
Isn't this a game that was supposed to be FUN?
Faction jumping realy is not an issue, short of sabotage on planets.
I don't think that loosing a planet or two because of that warrants perma-punishing players who simply like to mix and jiggle things to get the fullest out of their game, and are not sabotaging stuff.
Forcing players to group is simply a bad thing to do.
There are things a developer, or rather gamedsigner, should keep his fingers out of.
_________________
- In firepower we trust.
- I'm not buying this!
-we ran out of firepower.
|
Jar Jar Binks
Grand Admiral
Joined: December 25, 2001
Posts: 556
| Posted: 2009-03-06 14:07
Quote:
|
On 2009-03-06 12:33, Doran wrote:
without knowing exactly what mav has planned, you can likely (but not certainly) expect the folowing
players will probably be grouped automatically by fleet, since this puts unfleeters at a disadvantage, there'll likely be a mechanism to group unfleeted players.
group size will probably be restricted somewhat, say in the neighborhood of 8-12 players. this is as much for balance as it is screen space utilization
players receiving shared pres will not get it at 100% value, math's looking closer to (for example) 50% of a player's pres income is split among all the the other players in the group, with some weighting on account of rank.
shared pres will probably per-stat, combat pres shared as combat pres, build pres shared as build pres, etc.
there'll very likely be some sort of proximity and or idle timer in place to reduce the likelyhood of leechers who are too far away from the action or afk or otherwise not helping their team.
pres lost probably wont be shared, and we may end up increasing the res lost for ships again to compensate
|
|
great, forced grouping. i love it when someone else tells me how to play the game outside the RoC.
_________________
|
-Shadowalker-™
Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: September 23, 2007
Posts: 709
From: Shadows
| Posted: 2009-03-06 16:29
Forced grouping will creat a negative incentive, dont do it. period....
_________________
|
Azreal
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 14, 2004
Posts: 2816
From: United State of Texas, Houston
| Posted: 2009-03-06 17:45
I have to agree. If there IS forced grouping. How does it work if there are, say, to wolves in Sag, and they wanna group with the other Kluth? Also, I really am not sure why I would want to group at all. Fleeted or not. My tendency to smack planets while gazing in f2, my general role as a first strike or decoy don't enhance my prestige, much less anyone else's. Now you will force the prestige loss of dreads and stations galore upon the poor helpless members of my fleet. It seems hardly fair. Mostly kidding, but only lightly. In all seriousness, why would I wanna spread around the small, minor, many times insignificant amounts of prestige I get from a kill with anyone else? I'm not trying to sound selfish. It's just a fact of the way prestige is so lopsided. You think this will enhance everyone's play, but it will really just tick off the strong players and cause yet another exodus.
But the problem is the prestige gained in general. Before it is diluted among others. Small amounts for a kill, huge amounts by comparison for a loss. This, more than the K'luth cloak, is the complaint of all. Fix the prestige gain first, then maybe diluting our gains in some commie-style grouping scheme may actually be tolerant.
Nah. It won't be for me if it's forced. I'm just not going to be told how to play, with the exception of the RoC I agreed to.
I'm not oblivious to the fact that it's not for sure. I ordinarily wounldn't bother responding, because it isn't etched in stone. However, if this is in anyway being considered, it is a bad bad bad horrible idea.
Az
_________________
bucket link
|
mannythepogs
Grand Admiral
Pitch Black
Joined: July 12, 2007
Posts: 140
From: mbllanes
| Posted: 2009-03-06 21:49
DS is DS i guess, infact this is the only game ive seen wherein ONE ACCOUNT you can transfer from one faction to another.
And don't make it force grouping, i also disagree with it there is + & - to this, dont want anybody leeching, lol.
_________________
|
MrSparkle
Marshal
Joined: August 13, 2001
Posts: 1912
From: mrsparkle
| Posted: 2009-03-06 21:57
Is it really wise to share stats in groups? One person in a group can do all the ship capping, and eventually the whole group will have privateer badges. Or one person can do nothing but build plats and everyone will earn engineer badges. Same goes for all other badges.
Shared xp should be BONUS xp, without sharing actual stats. People should have to earn their badges the old fashioned way - by actually doing what the badges say they've done. How can someone have earned a privateer badge if someone else did all the capping?
Other than that, seems good. I'm fleetless and will probably forever remain so but at least I can group up if I want to.
_________________
|
DarkScorpion
Marshal
Sanity Assassins
Joined: September 14, 2004
Posts: 237
From: London England
| Posted: 2009-03-06 22:41
Ok after reading this post the idea of a stats share is a imagine the poor soul who has to have me in there group i love to be reckles and i have a resource loss that would chill the bones of most players,
as a option its great apart from sharing stats like capture of ships ,but to make it without choice is realy wrong and unfair
_________________
|
MrSparkle
Marshal
Joined: August 13, 2001
Posts: 1912
From: mrsparkle
| Posted: 2009-03-06 23:02
Crazy idea here and possibly impossible to implement, but how about instead of automatically grouping people according to fleet, you automatically group people according to system? If you have a few players in BD (there's always a few players in BD) and a few players in Luyten, the BD players are automatically grouped together, Luyten players automatically grouped together, and whenever someone moves to a new system they join that system's group? If you're the only one in the system you're in, you are in a group by yourself. There'd have to be no limits in group size though, and shared prestige would have to be scaled according to how many are in the system (the more in the system, the less prestige is shared)
I don't like the idea of automatically grouping fleets together. Seems like it would create a bit of division in a faction? After all, the faction is the main loyalty. There should be no difference between players of one fleet and players of another, but making them group automatically might cause that.
_________________
|
Russian Roulette with Muskets
Grand Admiral
Joined: September 04, 2002
Posts: 393
| Posted: 2009-03-07 09:03
I hope the concerns uttered here aren't silently ignored.
_________________
- In firepower we trust.
- I'm not buying this!
-we ran out of firepower.
|
Shigernafy
Admiral
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 5726
From: The Land of Taxation without Representation
| Posted: 2009-03-07 09:58
How about loudly?
_________________
* [S.W]AdmBito @55321 Sent \"I dunno; the French had a few missteps. But they're on the right track, one headbutt at a time.\"
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
