TGA
Sergeant
Reged: 01/17/05
Posts: 149
Loc: Michigan, USA
|
Level Structure
#162679 - 12/03/11 08:05 PM (72.53.194.237)
|
|
|
What exactly do you mean the level structure will be changing from 15 to something like 50?
--------------------
- Lois: "Peter, how can you tell me to calm down, there are people trying to kill me."
- Stewie: "Really, oh I have so many people to thank. First I would like to thank God, then ummm.... oh yes, SATAN"
Edited by ShadowMasterCM (12/04/11 12:28 PM)
|
mattbuck
Eeyore
Reged: 02/13/04
Posts: 3285
Loc: Nottingham, UK
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: TGA]
#162700 - 12/04/11 05:02 PM (128.243.253.104)
|
|
|
What he means is that each step will be smaller.
Currently every level up is roughly double the size of the previous one, which means a big lvlX can dow someone who doesn't even have half the empire size. This will be changed to say, 4 levels up = double size, so 1 level up is about 1.2* as big.
I'm guessing the DoW limits will be reworked on this basis, maybe 1 level down or 4 levels up.
--------------------
Haha, you people think admins still look at these forums.
Visit the Platonian! Updated! Stuff! Things! Click!
|
cbtgod
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 1813
Loc: IN A BOX UNDER A HOUSE
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: mattbuck]
#162704 - 12/04/11 09:01 PM (173.168.109.218)
|
|
|
non-forced faction wars would be nice also? see were this is going more empires able to hit more targets. and also able to help defend more faction mates also. so for once.....i have nothing to **** about here *face palms*.what about the empire point system how would this effect the points given? l8rs DABOSS
--------------------
yes its a toad, if you didnt know that you dont know anything about cbt
|
ShadowMasterCM
Captain
Reged: 12/07/05
Posts: 916
Loc: New York
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: cbtgod]
#162792 - 12/12/11 02:26 PM (173.243.45.2)
|
|
|
yeah the attack your level+1 would have to be tweaked as well when the L1 to L50 design is implemented. No details have been specified in that respect at this point, as that will be sorted later
As for being able to hit more targets, not really...you will likely have a lot of the same targets you do now, and possibly a few less.
For example that L9 that is 'hiding' in L8, and your empire is a high end L7 that just crossed into L8...with the new system you wont be able to reach that higher end empire, nor will they be able to attack you.
As for class points...that should be its own topic...but basically the class point system will get removed eventually and replaced with a more permanent research based system. You will need to decide early on what style empire you want to create and go forward from there.
As for the various benefits and penalties of the current class system, I like many of those ideas, and hope to intergrate many of them. They just wont be bounced around with these class points in the future.
--------------------
Is it true? Do you really suck that bad??
Neveron Promo Code: online gaming rocks
Facebook me!
My Space
|
Hannibal
Recruit
Reged: 04/30/03
Posts: 140
Loc: Australia
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: ShadowMasterCM]
#162978 - 12/22/11 03:10 PM (124.188.16.37)
|
|
|
For example that L9 that is 'hiding' in L8......
So is being a strong 8 a bad thing? While you may think it is unfair that the lvl 7 which becomes an 8 is then attacked by a stronger empire is unfair, it is part of what makes this game interesting. It means players have to think about consequences of actions and forge alliances and friendships. I have had the same thing happen to me, slipped into lvl 10, did not get a DC and got dow'd by a lvl 10 (hi Paus). Had I taken the time to get a DC, it may not have happened, although you can never tell with Paus what he will do.
This, and other changes sound very much like you want to have empires that all come out of the same cookie cutter mould.
What makes Nev unique, and as far as I have been able to find is that there is no defined way an empire will and must grow. You can be anything; Farm, Research or LW or most likely a combination of all three. If you want to play a game with defined and restricted options go play crap games like Evony, one of the best examples of good code with totally crap game play.
If you want to 'tweak' (sounds like more thought bubbles are escaping) the levels, then prevent empires from attacking down, and allow people unrestricted attacks upwards, if they can afford it of course. There are some serious lvl 6 empires out there that would be able to give a lvl 8 a run for their money.
"You will need to decide early on what style empire you want to create and go forward from there."
That spells the death knell for research. Proper research is not feasible at low levels. No one can afford or will risk TC's at low level. It is not til you get to 8+ that they become a real option. It has taken me 8 years to research my first mech in a lvl 9. In that time I have had a slow increase in research as I have built a military that can defend it. True research is the province of the big empires. Well big research empires could never exist under your idea. They would die before they ever got a foothold.
Cheers
Hannibal
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Hannibal]
#162993 - 12/22/11 06:37 PM (222.153.236.231)
|
|
|
I agree hanni. If you dont want to level up and get hit by a bigger emp, dont. Pretty simple. And you cant be a lvl 9 hiding at 8, cause then your just an 8. Just like the lvl 7 is just a 7, not an 8 hiding as a 7. Unless Baro is a lvl 14 hiding at 13 lol
History of nev says, the more restrictions you put in, and the more 'fair' you try and make things, the more boring the game becomes.
I think what needs to be decided, is this. Do we want to play a game that is:
- restricted, and the play style and form is dictated by the admin or
- open, the game admin creates an open evironment and we determine how to play as we play it
I would suggest that Shadow is trying to create the first. "This is how you play neveron, this is what you can and cant do" rather than "Here is neveron, play as you want"
What I have noticed in nev, is the more restrictions you place in the game play, the more people will take that game play to the extreme. EG, prior to the 'no attacks outside dow, and dow same level and up 1' change, along with the 'cannot end dows yourself' change, there seemed to be far less 'kill everything and destroy the emp' going on. It happened yes, but there were more game options available other than just killing.
If I had a vote, I would place mine in a less restrictive game play, where the basic platform was put in place, but what we wanted to do was (within limits) fairly open ended.
Simply put, I want to play neveron how I want to play it, not how shadowmaster wants me to play.
|
Katrar
Major
Reged: 09/15/02
Posts: 1314
Loc: Seattle, WA USA, Terra
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: buc]
#162995 - 12/22/11 08:48 PM (76.28.186.150)
|
|
|
SM is absolutely interested in the first. He sees old school sandbox nev as chaotic and unfair.
That's fundamental problem, as I see it, and it will be the real problem in retaining this community once SM starts to make real, code based changes to move Nev towards his vision. We, for the most part, are not interested in a restricted game where our actions are more or less controlled, and often dictated, by the game.
We've had that game for several years now and nobody is happy with it. I personally won't be happy with it even if its new and improved, it's not the reason I care about this game, and it never will be. And I can say with certainty, 100% certainty, that if Nev doesnt go back to some sort of sandbox and you all leave, I'm gone too. Nev in its current form, and direction, is meaningless to me.
--------------------
HoC Gaming - Come war with us!
The HoC Archive - Neveron's definitive historical document
|
KJI_3x6
Lieutenant
Reged: 09/11/06
Posts: 650
Loc: Minnesota, North Korea
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Katrar]
#163001 - 12/23/11 12:51 AM (75.72.9.83)
|
|
|
devils advocate says if you want no structure, a sandbox game, login abuse is absolutely fair game and nobody gets to **** about it.
just sayin.
--------------------
My d*** rumble in the jungle; your d*** got touched by your uncle.
My d*** double feature screen; your d*** went straight to dvd.
ME > you
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: KJI_3x6]
#163006 - 12/23/11 01:15 AM (222.153.236.231)
|
|
|
I didn't say no structure. And I'm not saying no rules. It's about ideals. I would like nev to be as least restrictive as possible while retaining some balance.
And remember, SM is about restrictions, but login abuse is still absolutely fair game so whats the point again??
|
Katrar
Major
Reged: 09/15/02
Posts: 1314
Loc: Seattle, WA USA, Terra
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: buc]
#163007 - 12/23/11 01:18 AM (76.28.186.150)
|
|
|
That login abuse logic pretty much only exists on Neveron. I don't think sandbox in any way, shape or form means login abuse is OK. Most games include protections in the EULA about proper use of logins, etc, and would ban a player for stealing a login. Nev never bothered with an EULA or even really any sort of player code of conduct. But that doesn't have anything to do with sandbox gameplay, that has to do with Nev not having any sort of player standards of behavior. Stealing logins will get you perma banned in 0.1 seconds on 99.9% of online games out there, by rule. Not always be action, because its hard to find/prove, but by rule.
--------------------
HoC Gaming - Come war with us!
The HoC Archive - Neveron's definitive historical document
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Katrar]
#163048 - 12/25/11 03:40 AM (184.1.118.183)
|
|
|
I have to agree with Kato here. SM regularly uses the word chaos when describing what neveron used to be. He views this chaos as something to be avoided and controlled and I say this is the exact opposite of what the game needs. SM has stated that the game grew to fast in this days, when really in todays version of neveron you can grow so rapidly in bv because of the ability to commission mass bv. Neveron grew rapidly, had huge wars, etc because the player base was so large. When you have thousands of players rather than hundreds you have a lot more empires being build, leading to more growth later. Old neveron was NOT chaotic, old neveron was complex.
Imagine a game of empire building and war where any empire at any level can have as much bv or pop as it wanted, could attack any empire with out a dow, could declare war on any empire of equal or greater level. Any empire could be made of mechs, tanks, infantry, towers in any ratio it wanted. In a world like this, where levels meant much less than they do now, a large empire could be pure infra and be susceptible to attack even by a much smaller empire by level. Smaller empires could swarm larger empires. Pure mech empires with no pop could be as deadly as empires many levels larger than it, or perhaps almost pure infra and weaker than empires many times smaller than it. It meant empires could have a sort of specialization, one that relied on other empires for aid. A war empires with nothing but mechs had no income, it relied on other empires to provide that income. Research, production, and general infra heavy empires were much weaker to attack and relied heavily on war empires to protect them. In large wars you have big production empires attacked by the war empires on one alliance, and then the war empires of another alliance either attacking the war empires or attacking the production empires of the enemy alliance. If a smaller empire went to war it had to rely on other empires to protect it from large mech forces of either big empires or empires of equal size but made purely out of bv.
Every situation was complex and dynamic and free flowing and exciting. You want to call this chaos, don't you SM? You want to view the overwhelming freedoms people had in how they built their empires and conducted their business as something that needs to be controlled and balanced. In fact, I believe you seem to mistakenly combine control and balance into one concept, but they are not the same SM. Old neveron needed changes, it needed balance, but it did not need controls. The complexity of old neveron was a wonderful thing, it was what made neveron such an amazing game, and you should not look to kill this supposed 'chaos' when doing so is killing the game. Instead you should be looking to find imbalances in the game.
For example, larger empires, such as marauderville, used to drop multiple assault mech battalions on smaller empires attacking their faction members. This was a problem. It could make for amazing complexity, but it also meant that for a smaller empire to go to war it had to rely on a larger empire to protect it. This gave larger alliances a huge edge in war. This is a complexity, but it is also an imbalance. The imbalance was the issue. The real solution to this problem was not to strip away all ability to fight empires that were not equal level, the answer was to limit the big empires ability to hit smaller empires. If they simply made it so big empires can only attack down if attacked first, that would have solved so much.
This game needs huge complexity and options while still being balanced. All that time I talked to you on the phone I was making a case for the maximum amount of freedom that is still balanced. It is obvious that is what the player base wants. You talk of caring exclusively about the long term health of the game as if it is an exercise in crushing empire freedoms. You talk as if putting in place strict rules of empires conduct, where, say, small lvl 7s never have to face large level 7s, or where war empires never should be able to to fight research empires. There is a way to open this game up to huge possibilities and be balanced at the same time. You are going the wrong way. You have already made up your mind about the ideas of players like me, hanni, buc, mattbuck, kato, pimpslap, malachi, gunner, etc as based on this foolish idea of trying to create chaos, when really we want to open the game options up for more complexity, and yet still have a balanced game. You should drop your preconceptions and try to listen to these veteran players in a new light.
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Maghetti123]
#163050 - 12/25/11 10:29 AM (70.173.25.223)
|
|
|
there are more then a few people that dont want a level 10 dropping on a level 2 just because they can. Alot of the 'limited targets' come from the big players of the game not wanting to lose units fighting the other big players of the game, so they nap/alliance with them. This is fine. Most of the arguements I see coming are people that spent alot of money making their empires, so they are rightfully reluctant to actually war with someone that would do damage, maybe even extreme damage.
Now you are saying that people should rely on others to protect their backs. Thats great. So why is it such a horrible deal to have it coded so when the protectors fail to do anything, the (for a lack of a better term) newer empires dont get crushed just because they dont have the level 10 to protect them?
As I see it, the game is based on real economics. He who has the dp army, normally destroys the non dp army. He who doesnt have walled cores and tented to hell tends to get dropped on as soon as the restriction phase ends. More then a few times i see the same empires being hit over and over again, and i get the very distinct impression it is the same person using multiple empires they own, of the same level. I can see that if the person that keeps getting hit donated, then they could rebuild alot quicker.
If they work on the classes and make the merc class cover a pure by empire, then bring it back. The mercs should rely on another empire to fund them and NOT have anything but some pop. No comms, nor research, nothing but a small amount of pop. They should also have every unit permanently mobbed. Thats pretty much they way mercs work.
I get the impression most of the long time players want to go back to the high level empires determine wiether you can actually play the game or not. If this is true, the game will lose even more players as they become the lesser alliance in the game, while promoting the stigmatism that anyone new must join so and so alliance or die.
I dont see people want to put a months worth of work into a game only to have it destroyed in a couple of hours due to the long time players knowing all the little tricks to the game.
A bug is found, but instead of allowing the empire the time to get it fixed, most people make sure it cannt strike back before its even looked at. Cannt have that. nope.
Now why is it such a bad idea to make a few more steps in levels at the higher end? People riding the edge of level 11/12 want to be able to hit that pop bloated 10 that just leveled due to a war? Sounds like a vulture.
I am a little slow at times, but it really seems people want to easily crush another empire without risking anything, then complain the game isnt that fun. Go out of your way and dow that high end empire that is the level above you. Give yourself the challenge you are looking for. You wont because it means you WILL lose units.
Lack of targets. That will become more and more prevailent as the few new people that play start doing what the long term players are doing and forcing the war of economics. Tents, cores, and such. That means having to fund your lower empires even more. Some of the restrictions that are looking to be make will remove some of these blocks. But lets face it. Most wanna keep them blocks to protect their butts but make is so no one else can do the same.
|
Gunner
Sergeant Major
Reged: 07/11/04
Posts: 365
Loc: Hurricane Capital of the World
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: ghostrider]
#163057 - 12/25/11 07:25 PM (173.65.23.244)
|
|
|
I, and others, are of the opinion that as a member of a faction or alliance, you have the inherent right and duty to protect your own. Yes, I absolutely dropped my 12-13 on level 6s hitting my guys, and yes, I killed their ****. Just like I'd expect my opponents to try to do to us. Many a war were started in that way, and it was fun. Much more fun then being told, here's your 6 people you are allowed to hit. I can't remember how many times you'd have lvl 5 or 6 fighting, and suddenly there's 10+ empires claiming up land or dropping on each other to try and give their side the advantage.
This game is, when being run properly and without ridiculous restrictions, like a model of the real world as it existed in feudal times. All the politics, wars, alliances, the market system. Real people are making these decisions, who to hit, what to sell or research, who to ally with or stab in the back. Whether or not to help and to what extent. That's what made it so fun. There's a reason people refer to "The Golden Age" of Neveron. We had thousands of logins per day around the world, people were happy, new people were coming and staying, the game was developing nicely. Then all of the sudden, the admins decided they needed to build a box, and try to force everyone into it. No more ending wars diplomatically, now you have to scrap half your army or get slaughtered. No more helping your alliance unless you can BP their units or have an empire of your own that level. We are here because we love the game, and we remember what it was like before, when it was fun, and we want it to be like that again, not even more restrictive.
As far as cores go, their locations were chosen for a reason. The map is filled with buildables. Every single zone has a 25% chance to be buildable. People with cores simply found an area with a cluster of them together, or found an area with 1 or 2 large buildables, and made them bigger. If you are going to try and remove cores, then you need to remove the option to DP up buildable slots, because that's all the people who made them did, find zones and DP them up. Are you going to come up with yet another restriction and say oh noes, you have too many large cities together, and make people move them in the future as well? Because I can easily go find 10 zones that are all together and buildable and make a new one.
--------------------
It's a bird...It's a plane...Goddamit! It's another NUKE!
Edited by Gunner (12/25/11 07:59 PM)
|
Katrar
Major
Reged: 09/15/02
Posts: 1314
Loc: Seattle, WA USA, Terra
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Gunner]
#163059 - 12/25/11 07:54 PM (67.185.51.133)
|
|
|
Except you are wrong, ghostrider, in thinking that veteran players want high level empires to determine who plays and who stays.
Here's the thing about high vs low. People that weren't around to see it make it out as if thats all high level empires were ever doing, attacking down, running noobs away from the game, slaughtering helpless level 2 empires day in day out.
Really it was nothing of the sort. High level empires hit down only rarely and it was 9 times out of 10, no probably 99 times out of 100 in the middle of a massive war that already involved 10+ empires in a dog fight. These sort of things were not impossibly rare, but they were rare.
What they did represent, however, was the freedom of action that Golden Age Neveron enjoyed. Those of you that weren't around for Golden Age Neveron, and read our descriptions of that time with a doubtful and in some cases disbelieving eye really did miss out on what Neveron was all about.
Let me ask you this, and this is to those of you who didn't experience golden age Nev and are uncertain about the real experience or value of those olden days... why did you keep playing? Was it because the game itself was just so awesome post 2005/6 that even if all your opponents were AI, you'd never be able to leave? Or was it because of the community. I suspect the latter. Well, the only reason the community was born at all was because of the nature of old school Nev. The political and social complexity of the game created this community. Freedom did that, not constrictive boxing in. If it were not for the way old school Nev worked Neveron would indeed be nothing more than a game that noobs play for a week or two, dp a few bucks and then move on. New Nev, Nev today, I highly doubt would be able to support any real community at all if it were to have started from scratch today. Who would stay around for it?
That's just my roundabout way of saying... old school Nev, and the ways in which its various systems interacted, is the only thing responsible for this community still existing, or even existing at all, and as others have said... to discredit it and suggest it was wrong, is to ignore why any of us - including yourselves - even read this forum and participate in this discussion.
--------------------
HoC Gaming - Come war with us!
The HoC Archive - Neveron's definitive historical document
|
jake
Sergeant
Reged: 01/11/05
Posts: 147
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Gunner]
#163060 - 12/25/11 07:57 PM (69.201.164.45)
|
|
|
Agree with Mags and Gunner....nev was cool when you could do whatever you wanted and the possibilities and outcomes were infinite. It did work like the real world and I still think when it was in its purest form a great societal simulator. Problem was exponential growth while the decisions made to counter that exponential growth didn't work. Open it back up.
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: jake]
#163062 - 12/25/11 10:38 PM (184.1.118.183)
|
|
|
Ugh, Ghostrider, could you have made a more wild and irrational post? Did you read my post at all? I did no say I want to force people to have to rely on other empires. I did not say this, yet everything you wrote was based on this premise. I want to give people the FREEDOM to build different types of empires. You don't actually have to have a research empire that is defensiveless, or a war empire with no pop, or what ever the hell it is. You can have perfectly balanced empires. Even in old nev, any type of empire existed an worked fine.
The class structure forces empires to be something. You want to be a producer? Alright then have bad defenses. You want to be a war empire? Alright then have bad income. No. This is just forcing limitations when empires will become what they want anyways.
"Now why is it such a bad idea to make a few more steps in levels at the higher end? People riding the edge of level 11/12 want to be able to hit that pop bloated 10 that just leveled due to a war? Sounds like a vulture."
If a empire is riding the edge of a level, that is called BEING that level. It has nothing to do with killing smaller empires of that level, it is called being that level. There are plenty of ways to jump a level and establish yourself. You don't necessarily have to be as big to either win or at least not be worth attacking. You can plan ahead of time and establish defenses before building the infra. You can use DCs. etc.
You are coming from the angle that all this has to do with me wanting to crush empires. I don't know if you know this, but I am amazing at this game, I do not need empires weaker for me to kill them. The changes proposed does NOT hurt weaker empires. I already told you this. What super cores and walling and tents do is make war empires stronger, because they have better offensive stuff than you AND an unbreakable defense. Also, when I have talked about opening up war options, the battles I have in mind are not going down in a way where the attacker has an easier time. Faster is not easier. Fighting a batt on batt mech battle is much faster than sieging a properly set up 1ker, but that is haaaard. My idea was to encourage battles that are fun. Where both sides can kill the other side. Battles don't have to be one sided. A properly set up empire can kill you all the same if you have 216 unit city defenses, it just takes them longer.
And finally, people are forced to do those things because they work. Whether it is a dp whore empire or a crappy infra farm, you need those things to compete with other empires doing them. You remove those things from the game, and suddenly no one needs them because no one would have them to have an advantage over anyone else.
|
TRK
Sergeant Major
Reged: 11/05/02
Posts: 254
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: jake]
#163063 - 12/25/11 10:42 PM (173.181.67.112)
|
|
|
For what its worth coming from me:
Yes, open it back up.
I have said this before, but I will say it again. More than once I was dropped on by a larger empire. Yes, I lost mechs. Was it tragic? No. Was it game ending for my empire? No. Did I get a chance to kill one or two of their mechs? Yes. Was is fun? Hell yeah. Would I subscribe to experience the same nev again? You bet your ****.
Gunner knows what he is talking about. He has done this sort of thing to save my mechforce . A level 6 (IIRC) dropped on my level 4. It was way more than I could handle so Gunner jumped in to help. One of the level 6's "big friends" decided to hit back and dropped upgraded mechs on Gunner. I believe the outcome was the lvl 6 and myself escaping and Gunner losing quite a few mechs. The point is I remember it (from possibly 7-9 years ago) fairly clearly, maybe not the exact events, but the way it made me feel. I will not soon forget it.
I think Gunner and Kato have done well in painting a picture of the Golden Age. Once I finished reading this, I started to realise why there is such a gap of understadning between vets and newer players. Newer players would, I suppose, include our current admin. No offence (for once) is intended in that statement.
Edited by TRK (12/26/11 12:22 AM)
|
NeverSayNever
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 11/18/02
Posts: 1655
|
Re: Level Structure [Warning! May contain sarcasm and such ...]
[Re: TRK]
#163067 - 12/26/11 03:46 AM (78.50.240.228)
|
|
|
Sorry to burst some rose tinted bubbles of pure nostalgia but the "Golden Age" of Neveron some of you guys seem to 'remember' kind of never really existed, well, at least not in the way your rose tinted glasses / 'blinders' make some of you want to believe ...
One might even argue that the "Golden Age" of Neveron was nothing but a 'Golden Age' of pretty much unrestricted 'Gang Banging, Ganking and Griefing' - so not necessarily a pleasant and or fun in game experience for all parties involved - well at least not for the players at the receiving end of this kind of special treatment , but of course your mileage may vary, particularly if you happened to be one of the few lucky guys dishing out the unrestricted gang banging, ganking and or griefing ...
The real difference between 'old era' (at its height up to 4000+ log-ins per day) and 'new era' (up to approx. 200+ log-ins per day) is simply numbers, like total number of players, total number of empires / 'targets' / 'prey', total number of customers at the various in game marketplaces, total number of donators - big or small, which resulted in a much more vibrant community / game world - and more revenue to help keep Neveron's staff paid - and the servers up and running ...
I seriously doubt that keeping most of the few new players and their empires small and weak, in extreme even ganking them while still on "Noob (Cannibal) Island", is going to pay off long term ...
No new customers (well, maybe except for their own alt account empires, or friends and family) for the producing empires (= boring, no profit to be made), no new donators to help spread out and lessen the individual donator's burden of financing the survival of the game (= less people having to donate a bigger share, or in a worst case scenario with shrinking numbers of players / donators an increasing share to be paid by fewer donators, which only increases the influence / power of the few remaining big donators - and if one or more of the few remaining bigger donators leave, or threaten to leave, well, kind of hard to keep the game up and running, or implement any necessary - but probably unwanted by some of the established players - changes while running low on funds already ...) ...
In the end there's little to no incentive at all for Neveron's 'establishment' / 'the rich' / 'the haves' (= the big, rich, old, heavily entrenched (= walled, cored and or tented to the max) sugar daddy uber empires and their twinked out to the max, over supplied, uber (DP-whore) landwar empires) to change the current, highly comfortable (at least for the minority of 'the haves') situation ...
Simply make sure to keep the 'have nots' small, weak and powerless ...
Keep up the established status quo which favors 'the haves' and enjoy the fruits of your high level farm empires while having fun spanking some new 'peons' (= the 'have nots') with one of your low level alt empires - some kind of in game 'feudalism' at its finest, but hey, at least this kind of strictly follows the classic BattleTech lore / background story (neo feudal, 31st Century Land Lords building 'castles' (cores), surrounded by moats / walls (one city instant surrender vassals, err, alt empires), while riding inside their shining. mighty BattleMechs, ruling their lands, stealing, err, sorry, heroically conquering, from their weaker neighbours, taxing their vassalls, err, faction mates - instead of medieval knights residing in their castles, taxing their peasants, riding on their war horses, wearing shining plate mail while looting their weaker neighbour's peasants, sieging their castles, or whatever) ...
Sigh, ain't it funny that (gaming) history rarely tends to repeat itself?
By the way, if you want to join the 'establishment' / 'the old boys club' / the 'land lords' you either simply buy an old, established empire, or you donate a few thousand bucks and build up your very own, new. big sugardaddy empire from scratch, to finally join the 'endgame' 'content' (= hunting / 'ganking' 'peons' for sports, entertainment and such) ...
Unfortunately it looks like this Free For All, PvP, full loot online game is still bleeding 'peons' - and where's the 'fun' if there are not enough 'peons' left to dominate and or push around?
Just some food for thought ...
Have a nice day / night.
|
mattbuck
Eeyore
Reged: 02/13/04
Posts: 3285
Loc: Nottingham, UK
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: TRK]
#163068 - 12/26/11 03:51 AM (95.148.187.2)
|
|
|
Frankly, the most important thing about the old days was diplomacy.
I remember I went to war against a guy, took a few cities, then casper` came online and threatened me unless I stopped, since it was apparently protected by Cult or somesuch. We talked, negotiated, amicably, and because the person I'd hit had been an idiot and not bothered to say "protected by", I got to keep the infra I'd taken and walk away. Within 3 days I was able to cancel the DoW.
Yes, CANCEL the DoW. No need for him to self-surrender, no nev-mandated cease-fire, just an agreement between both sides that the war was over.
How did Cas threaten me? Yes, she said she'd bring bigger empires to hit me, and I knew she could. That was the way the game was played. People had small border wars - I wanted some land, I'd hit my neighbours, no matter what level they were. Then we'd talk and likely become friends, since all I wanted was a few outlying zones. Occasionally, yes, there were issues, but in general the way wars worked was this:
See if anyone's looking.
Attack
Negotiate with whoever is now staring at you with an angry face
Withdraw having not destroyed any empires and without having to scrap your whole military or lose skills.
It was FUN in a way war nowadays simply isn't.
--------------------
Haha, you people think admins still look at these forums.
Visit the Platonian! Updated! Stuff! Things! Click!
|
cbtgod
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 1813
Loc: IN A BOX UNDER A HOUSE
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: mattbuck]
#163069 - 12/26/11 06:24 AM (173.168.109.218)
|
|
|
i see its post and neg side effects. and i also see the few will ruin it for the many. if we even have many anymore? i dont think lifting lvl restrictions will do anything for this game. but give people the ok to use proxy empires and factions to gangbang even more then they do now. if we had more players we wouldnt need to even talk about this. just seems people only want to flex their high lvl empires on smaller ones and be bullies. id like to see faction wars back. and as matt pointed out take the handcuffs off when it comes to ending wars on my options. we have more important issues to care about then more targets in a game that dsnt work and has a almost nil player base. l8rs DABOSS
--------------------
yes its a toad, if you didnt know that you dont know anything about cbt
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: cbtgod]
#163070 - 12/26/11 07:19 AM (184.1.118.183)
|
|
|
It just seems *insert ignorant baseless assumptions here*.
The entire point is to go back to a more fun nev and balance the game around that, not to allow mass Gbing. Limited options does not equal a fairer game.
|
Katrar
Major
Reged: 09/15/02
Posts: 1314
Loc: Seattle, WA USA, Terra
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: cbtgod]
#163074 - 12/27/11 03:10 AM (76.28.186.150)
|
|
|
This one change by itself wouldn't do anything. And by itself it would probably be detrimental. But as a part of a move back towards the freedom of early Nev, in combination with other changes (mb's example of being able to cancel DoW at will beyond 3 days without negative consequence is a perfect example), this would play a part. Freedom has been removed form the game in so many different areas, any one alone can't be looked at as the solution. And nobody's looking at attack up/down as any single solution. No way. It's simply a moving part in a different design philosophy.
Also, NSN, nice job closing out the year with more nonsense. What you wrote was so hard to parse into a coherent point, even I stopped trying. Nice.
--------------------
HoC Gaming - Come war with us!
The HoC Archive - Neveron's definitive historical document
|
Gunner
Sergeant Major
Reged: 07/11/04
Posts: 365
Loc: Hurricane Capital of the World
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Katrar]
#163075 - 12/27/11 04:07 AM (173.65.23.244)
|
|
|
I remember that Match, I dropped my OSR-2M batt on Dawk Hawkins, and he got so upset about it, it eventually led to what has been referred to by some as one of the best wars on Nev. To my knowledge, it was the last true big war, involving over 100 empires, the KOS-Llama faction war. Probably about 60 empires in both factions, plus 12 mercs for myself, something like 18 for Dawk due to a loophole in the rules, and all the non-mercing empires who got involved as well. This was what Nev was about, helping your alliance. I gladly dropped my Ostrocs, and I'd gladly do it again for my guys if needed to rescue them. I would expect the same of any faction leader. You're not just there to collect taxes and sit. With all those taxes, you can afford to buy new mechs.
And Jake, the system they put in place to stop exponential growth was corruption. That, more then anything, stopped us. You can't afford to pay out 160 million a nevday in corruption that isn't reduceable. That and unit caps basically mean that while large empires do create lag, it is manageable because they can only grow so big. We're allowed 10k units, whether they're 10k geckos, or 10K towers. They take the same amount of space in the DB, the people/pilots take up the same space per person. We can only have so many cities, because after that corruption curve starts on the exponential upslope, you're screwed. We may create lag, but as I said in my own thread, we're needed to make things and help keep the game running. NASI has it's prices, players have their own.
--------------------
It's a bird...It's a plane...Goddamit! It's another NUKE!
|
cbtgod
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 1813
Loc: IN A BOX UNDER A HOUSE
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Gunner]
#163076 - 12/27/11 04:36 AM (173.168.109.218)
|
|
|
but...katrar, gunner you guys both know someone will use this as a way to create or make a loophole. for every 9 decent players we always get 1 turd. i agree this game has more rest then an irs audit. and tbh the enitre economy is beyond 72 iq. we these things are not being looked at just tells me as a player that SM dsnt really care about the how restricted we are? from tard mine taxes on ores you get charged every day? to storage of vechs. its not wonder anyone even has a mech.
all im saying is prob nobody in here posting would try anything shady. but we will always have turd players in any game period. i had suggested an idea a while ago that as always got ignored. that like a merc a FL could lend a set amount of his own bv to any faction mate in a war or poss make it like a defense patrol? this is pretty much the same thing but at least we would have guide lines and try to curb any loopholes. this would be like a sliding scale of allowed poss bv per lvl of empire. and would only apply to empires in your faction. it is in the sense the same thing you guys are talking about but its a set way to well keep the turds at bay? l8rs DABOSS
--------------------
yes its a toad, if you didnt know that you dont know anything about cbt
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: cbtgod]
#163095 - 12/27/11 11:10 PM (184.1.118.183)
|
|
|
Daboss, the game was like this when there were 10000 players, you don't think there were people around who took full advantage of any potential loophole? Of course there was. We know exactly how the game functioned and what was abusable and what was balanced. We can restore the old freedoms and then balance around it. There were problems with old nev, definitely, but the solutions exist, and the end result of old nev plus some rather simple balance work is a much more dynamic game with all the same balance. You greatly overestimate the loopholes of the time. Hell, just combining some of the newer features with old nev crushes 90% of the issues.
|
cbtgod
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 1813
Loc: IN A BOX UNDER A HOUSE
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Maghetti123]
#163096 - 12/28/11 05:45 AM (173.168.109.218)
|
|
|
i see your point but i was one of the few that didnt, and still dont take those types of advantages. i guess only time will tell if the player base will rise above being tempted to be a turd? the game in general has a long way to go before its even a speck of what other browser based mmos are out there. l8rs DABOSS
--------------------
yes its a toad, if you didnt know that you dont know anything about cbt
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: cbtgod]
#163106 - 12/28/11 03:18 PM (49.227.221.208)
|
|
|
I totally agree, that you dont remove freedoms to fix balancing issues, you balance things. Nev is extrememly static currently. Make nev more open, and yeah, some people get the **** kicked out of them, but that was half the fun. Politics were far more fluid, and I dont remember the entire destruction of an empire being the primary reason for a fight as it is now.
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: buc]
#163123 - 12/30/11 12:40 AM (70.173.25.223)
|
|
|
I believe most people agree that you should be able to cancel wars. It avoided the must destroy an empire bs that is rampant in nev.
Now as for getting the hell beat out of someone being half the fun, Yes it was. If you were not the one on the recieving end, it was a blast. That has been what ive been trying to get across. The feeling i get is most people dont want to be limited on blasting those established empires, or the ones that will cost them to attack, so open up all the rest so they can have fun. Doesnt matter about those that will be blasted. Some say they will help rebuild. Thats great. For a small empire such as a level 2, even at max restriction, it will require more time to find and rebuild, then you can pump money into the empire.
But by all means, open it back up. Soon those people will get tired of being beat to hell, and stop playing, then alls that will be left is even less people with their hd only tented to hell empires looking for more targets, then want you to pull all defenses out, since they will require more chance of losing things, or spending soo much killing the lessers then. And then the cycle continues. Yeah, when there were thousands of log ins it was great. Kill all those empires over and over again until what??? They got tired and stopped playing.
My take is the cycle will continue until its only the elites left. Closing in on that point now. How many empires are actually owned by different real people? Most claim less then 5, but seem to have over that just to limit who can hit what.
|
mattbuck
Eeyore
Reged: 02/13/04
Posts: 3285
Loc: Nottingham, UK
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: ghostrider]
#163126 - 12/30/11 03:25 AM (95.148.186.69)
|
|
|
Thing is ghostrider, back then people really COULD help you rebuild. As in they could actually build stuff for you, because you could dow attack and cancel dow without further harm. We called them land transfers, and they were pretty common.
--------------------
Haha, you people think admins still look at these forums.
Visit the Platonian! Updated! Stuff! Things! Click!
|
cbtgod
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 1813
Loc: IN A BOX UNDER A HOUSE
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: mattbuck]
#163127 - 12/30/11 05:29 AM (173.168.109.218)
|
|
|
and as i rember the player base cried like mommy i dropped my ice cream about those LTs also? spec login abuse issues tied to LTs. id love to see us have 1000s of logins again. tbh the server cant handle the amount of players we have now? let alone the game dsnt work. more important things need to be taken care of like the dozens of bug ridden empires that are stll not fixed after 2 weeks? why change things if it isnt even working right now? to move forward the game needs to be rid of bugs period. and we did used to do alot of what matt pointed out but thats when we had well 100s more players. and with 100s more players the same faction and or players didnt get hit all the time either. they act had time to rebuild. but now the norm is 1 hr after your rest is up you get hit again etc. fix the bugs and the player base will grow. add something to appeal to new players. try as hard as it may be for some of you to be *lol* polite to people in chat? some of the rants in the PMs dont help either. and im guilty of that myself sometimes. if we as the player base rise to a higher standard......the player base will follow. l8rs DABOSS
--------------------
yes its a toad, if you didnt know that you dont know anything about cbt
|
TRK
Sergeant Major
Reged: 11/05/02
Posts: 254
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: cbtgod]
#163129 - 12/30/11 10:49 AM (173.181.67.112)
|
|
|
All I get out of this is ghostrider and DABOSS slamming the game. Slamming it when it was successful and fun. Maybe you guys should be the ones to leave if you dont like WAR GAMES. You wanna play and not be hit by anyone. Go play something else where you cant lose stuff. Tired of you guys whining incessantly about how all Nev is beat on the noob.
GET OVER IT, IT IS A WAR GAME.
If people want to leave for losing a war, then we dont want them quitters and whiners to begin with.
|
Cray
General
Reged: 07/27/01
Posts: 4131
Loc: North America
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: TRK]
#163131 - 12/30/11 11:21 AM (97.101.96.171)
|
|
|
Quote:
All I get out of this is ghostrider and DABOSS slamming the game. Slamming it when it was successful and fun. Maybe you guys should be the ones to leave if you dont like WAR GAMES. You wanna play and not be hit by anyone. Go play something else where you cant lose stuff. Tired of you guys whining incessantly about how all Nev is beat on the noob.
GET OVER IT, IT IS A WAR GAME.
Throttle it back a step, TRK, before you trip over another rule.
--------------------
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Cray]
#163132 - 12/30/11 12:52 PM (70.173.25.223)
|
|
|
Considering you are in the process of selling your empires cuz you dont like whats going on, you are very much calling the kettle black.
I am not slamming the game as much as pointing out that not everyone was hand fed how to play the game. Da boss hasnt done much to say its a nott beat down. He has stated that there is problems with the game, such as bugs and yeah, occassional issues with gb's and such.
I have tried to bring forth the point of view that most people just starting the game have only one thing they can do quickly, and thats get wiped out. You attack your neighbor and the first thing you find is a neg gunned panther that eliminates your lance of mg jeeps without an issue, and sometimes it does so without you even getting it on the screen. With that, why would you want to stay in the game.
Alot of people want it the old way. Only real good thing about that was the thousands of other empires in the game to hit, meant you didnt have to rebuild every other week. Now it has come down to pound the people that arent set up like the elite empires, or spend hunreds of millions of nevbucks to even cf a real tent.
I agree it was better with the cancel the war button. I definately agree with daboss on the bug issue. That alone is driving and gonna keep people from playing long and needs to be fixed first. Sm is trying to get an idea on how to make the better inthe future, and people wanna say dont think about that, fix it now. Until he has the knowledge and the support, the best he can do is try and work on it, but having a plan on how to proceed will help those that dont like some of the changes coming to understand whats up. It is possible not much can be done. Many long time people here wont deal with some of the changes needed, cuz that means the same old grind wont be able to continue. Some of the new people wont be able to close the gap, so they will leave.
The game needs to be fun for all, not just a select few. With the player base so low, the select few are the ones doing alot of the supporting of the game.
Really. how many of the people back then left because the game was 'fun'? How many of them wont return because of that fun? Once it became 2 sides, the fun stopped. It became hit only this set of empires.
Why dont you have some friendly wars with your freinds? That would make it fun again, because neither side would cheat/abuse loop holes and all the other things that make the game less fun. You could have your bv on bv fights. Oh wait. That would mean losing units and skilled soldiers. thats not fun. That would mean you didnt have to destroy someone elses empire. That wouldnt be fun.
|
cbtgod
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 1813
Loc: IN A BOX UNDER A HOUSE
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Cray]
#163133 - 12/30/11 12:53 PM (173.168.109.218)
|
|
|
no i want balance and a war game *ahem* can have balance. but all i hear is nerf this. and change this and do that which all seems to favor the attacker? when every thing in a game only really favors one type of play its not balanced is it? l8rs DABOSS
--------------------
yes its a toad, if you didnt know that you dont know anything about cbt
|
Malachi
Sergeant Major
Reged: 04/19/04
Posts: 369
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: cbtgod]
#163134 - 12/30/11 02:58 PM (90.219.44.159)
|
|
|
Interestingly, most suggestions that get put forward would benefit the attacker. However, they also call for the penalties of losing to be reduced - damage rather than destruction of buildings, the ability to remove some units to an "off planet" location.
So yes, things suggested predominantly favour the attacker. This means the person hitting ANY zone, offensive action should always be part of a defence strategy. Making things change hands more frequently, with less infrastructure damage could enable this.
I would also very much like to see time penalties on zone attacks by units so it doesnt revolve around who has the best connection, and it enables a defender to bring in their forces if they are online.
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Malachi]
#163135 - 12/30/11 08:05 PM (121.90.131.151)
|
|
|
TBH, I think Ghost just sounds like he doesn't like getting attacked. Just think, I've been part of the only alliance to be constantly attacked over the past few years. It has virtually been the game vs HoC. Do you hear anyone whining about being attacked??
Did you actually play during the time we're talking about? Cause I actually dont hear very many people who actually played, that look at that time in a bad light. Even the very few that did get beat down by a larger emp (I'm one of them), we just sucked it up since it was part of the game, and made things interesting. Losing is just part of a war game.
DABOSS, the one thing to remember here. If you're at war with another active empire, you're BOTH attackers and both defenders. If things are more fluid, without walls etc etc, then yes zones will change hands more, but also you can war them back easier too.
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: buc]
#163136 - 12/30/11 10:21 PM (70.173.25.223)
|
|
|
wasnt here for the really big wars. I got in and immediately got the economy lesson. When i finally got some money up to actually get to fight back, i leveled up from pop then got nailed by another empire the guy that hit owned after he was losing big. nothing like a pop bloated level 3 upped to 4 getting hit by a damn bv only level 6.
Losing a war is part of the game. I also think that if you want new people to stick around, there needs to be a closure in the gap between the people that have 100 hd only cities hitting all the people that have a 3 city level 3 because they dont know every little trick in the game. Yes, its part of the learning curve. Yes there are a few that will hound someone until they leave. Yes its not a big amount that does it. I just dont like to be forced with donate heavily or die, because the opponent has a deep pocket empire funding them with everything.
Be truthful. How many big empires really donate money to the game, and not realy on buying dp with nev cash?
It appears that in order to balance the game properly requires things that arent gonna be popular at all. Im still half ready to leave because of the lack of a firm stance on log in abuse. I think maybe the way to balance the game would be limit all people to one empire.
And buc. part of the problem seems to be its still hoc vs everyone else. If your not with one, then you are automatically part of the other, even though they dont want or will help you.
and as i said. When there were thousands of empires out there to be attacked, you had a chance to recover. Now you cannt really get soldiers trained enough to put up a decent fight unless you already had them training from the last attack. and low empires without funding and other help cannt find new buildables and get back up before the next empire hits it.
|
Katrar
Major
Reged: 09/15/02
Posts: 1314
Loc: Seattle, WA USA, Terra
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: buc]
#163137 - 12/30/11 10:23 PM (76.28.186.150)
|
|
|
This doesn't have to be about noobs at all. The biggest advantage noobs had back in the day was anonymity. They were generally left alone because nobody could find them. There was no unfactioned empire list. There was no biggest cities list. These two changes more than ANYTHING else that ever happened on Neveron were what doomed noobs to be nothing more than fodder. Noobs were hit by passing raiders when they were physically discovered on the map, which would be MUCH more difficult today with most people limited to only level 1. Most noobs were in fact attacked by their closest neighbors. Other noobs.
So you want to protect noobs? Remove unfac empires list, and remove biggest cities list. Those are free anti-noob targeting aids.
This argument has been made before, many times. Why are these lists still there? Neveron has nothing but itself to blame for the plight of noobs. After all, Neveron made war the mess it is, and then basically said hey, over here, some fresh meat thats not tented, walled, uber fake repped and modded to hell and back!
So I really don't want to hear any more bullshit about how the plight of the noob is all the players fault. Screw that, at this point, a year later, with these facts having been stated for years... its Neveron's fault. Take note, SM.
--------------------
HoC Gaming - Come war with us!
The HoC Archive - Neveron's definitive historical document
|
cbtgod
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 1813
Loc: IN A BOX UNDER A HOUSE
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Katrar]
#163139 - 12/31/11 04:11 AM (173.168.109.218)
|
|
|
i dont see why we need to even have the top 100 list tbh? it gives out to much free intell in my eyes. you do have to admit katrar a vet hittting a noob is in it self is unbalanced. but then again with people using proxy empires and factions to start trouble. how do we know whos a noob and whos not anymore? then you have bored vets on noob island due to im bored to death. no one tells a vet player to beat up on noobs. and a vet player will know a noob from vet when they war them. l8rs DABOSS
--------------------
yes its a toad, if you didnt know that you dont know anything about cbt
|
Malachi
Sergeant Major
Reged: 04/19/04
Posts: 369
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: cbtgod]
#163140 - 12/31/11 04:30 AM (90.219.44.159)
|
|
|
Agree with Kato, that would solve most of it, joining a faction is the cue to remove anonymity.
Top 100 list should be kept, but remove empire name. So basically you would suddenly maybe spot a mech you recognised when fighting, could be quite good, or even automatic game provided bounty on the mechs in the top 100, nothing huge, just something? Anyway, thats minor.
Interestingly, talking MB about the old days and the biggest thing was that a lack of restrictions meant that often people would intervene with larger emps, but stop far short of the game provided line. Now, with more restrictions people play to that line leading to worse consequences. I remember having my 5 dropped on by a SoL 13 and running like hell. I got out, he paid 1bil or so to do that drop and drive me off. It was fun.
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Malachi]
#163141 - 12/31/11 09:34 AM (70.173.25.223)
|
|
|
Katrar. You want me to rely on PLAYERS to behave right? Hoppy isnt the only one to abuse bugs in the game, just one of the few that actually admitted it to the public.
You also pointed out exactly WHY there needs to be limits in the game to make it fun for ALL.
My take on this is its not the fault of the criminal for using the gun, its the gun manufactureres fault for making the gun. This is partially about the noobs, but also part of the fact, to rebalance the game, the extremes needs to go.
Remove the largest city list. That means when one of the people that has hours on end hits you, you cannt do anything back because you didnt spend hours trying to find their cities on the level 1 map. How eay is it to find out where any city in the world is? Nev dont have the internet so the list is the closest thing to it. Part of rebalancing the game would be people actually defending other zones besides the biggest cities. OH no, bv used for something other then attack??? If all the cities were listed, the tents would start disappearing, since hiding behind the lack of intel wouldnt be an option.
Fake rep. Get rid of the benifits for rep outside the arena. To my knowledge people use fake wars to SKILL THEIR UNITS. So according to those that are against getting rep in fake wars, this part of it needs to get changed as well.
Yes, facts have been stated. Yet more then a few dont see them all. What benefits me needs to stay, but what hinders me needs to go or stay out of the game. I dont care about balance, just me doing what I want, and screw the rest.
Why are people sooo anxious to drop their level 10+ empires on the smaller empires anyways? Cannt beat them with the lower empires anymore?
And you are right. its neverons old admins fault for not fixing these problems before now.
|
Gunner
Sergeant Major
Reged: 07/11/04
Posts: 365
Loc: Hurricane Capital of the World
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: ghostrider]
#163142 - 12/31/11 05:08 PM (173.65.23.244)
|
|
|
You still don't seem to get it. We aren't trying to drop our high level empires on noobs and small empires. We are TRYING TO DEFEND OUR FACTION! None of the level 10s went around the map randomly dropping on level 6 cities, because attack costs were prohibitive. Billions of dollars for 1 city attack. But you goddamn well better believe if a level 6 with a Rhino is hitting one of my guys that has market mechs, I'm going to drop in and we're going to see how he likes fighting when my Ostroc batt is caving his cockpit in. We don't have attack costs anymore which is why people tent, to make you claim zones or HD to hit them and run you out of money. Back in the day, it was 2 mil to hit an empty zone, and higher costs for cities, based on what was in them CF wise. People didn't tent like this, SoI wasn't an issue, and level 11 and 12 empires were at -400 billion because asshats wanted to click their cities after building up to them.
As for your comment about bigger empires being needed to beat smaller ones, I have 78 million a nevday surrender income from an empire twice my size that says you're wrong. Maybe people should spend more time defending their empires and being active players then they do whining about how unfair it all is. Maybe people should stop telling themselves how amazing they are and instead, show it. Life isnt fair and balanced. Get over it.
The simple fact remains, this game was much much different when it had a huge playerbase, and that playerbase was decimated by stupid policies and rule changes which forced literally thousands of players away. It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to be able to figure out that in a game that is player donation supported, you give the players what they want, not what you feel like will force them to donate more, because there's no gun to my head making me open my wallet. Also for whomever said the big players don't donate, you're mistaken. I've been running pools for years, I still have my notebook I used to use to send in the pools before the profile system, and I have records of my pools since we got the new profile system, and I can easily say that quite a few of the larger empires donate quite a bit, myself included. Don't assume just because some people buy DP with nevcash, that they never donate. Many people have grown their empires from selling DP and having a steady source of income, and when you're running a big empire, it takes big DP to get stuff done faster.
--------------------
It's a bird...It's a plane...Goddamit! It's another NUKE!
|
Katrar
Major
Reged: 09/15/02
Posts: 1314
Loc: Seattle, WA USA, Terra
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Gunner]
#163143 - 12/31/11 06:09 PM (76.28.186.150)
|
|
|
It seems patently obvious at this point that the people who weren't around during Nev's glory days just don't get it, and never will get it.
--------------------
HoC Gaming - Come war with us!
The HoC Archive - Neveron's definitive historical document
|
Dee
Sergeant Major
Reged: 02/15/06
Posts: 248
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Katrar]
#163144 - 12/31/11 07:04 PM (184.171.199.45)
|
|
|
Speaking as someone who WAS around in the glory days, who gets what you're saying, I'm afraid your rose coloured glasses obscures a few important details. Can you remember the days that you were in a small independant faction or alliance? When your biggest empire in fact was a 7 or 8? Just think back to the time that you couldn't take offensive action, at all, because empires better connected than you, with much deeper pockets, were waiting to "defend their faction" when their offensives failed.
Do you remember the days when surrendering didn't end a battle? What did people do, then, when they killed enough of an empire's forces to surrender them but still the battle played out? If you remember the way I do it was usually just until everything was killed.
Oh oh, do you remember the time that SVE attacked your faction and you were told not to fight back because it would get your whole faction killed if you did?
OOOooooooh do you remember when big empires could hotdrop into claimed land to stop pursuits when an empire's offensive went badly? Yeah, I sure remember how much fun THAT was.
Unfortunately Kato, Gunner, Malachi, Buc`, everyone else who doesn't understand the point being made, when you were enjoying your glory days, a lot of us noobs and nobodies were playing a completely different game. One of not making any noise, not rocking any boats and not fighting back when the big alliances wanted a free run through something. Your glory days involve being one of the big guys, so you remember it fondly.
Now that that's said, what are your thoughts on that? Do you really think bring back that level of freedom to the game and community right now would actually be a healthy and positive change? It would be, beyond a doubt, the most destructive change this already shrinking playerbase has seen in years. How would you feel when your dp whore empire, while out and about one a little romp, had TWG and all it's fake repped, uber upgraded mech batts just, I dunno, drop on you? Actually, not just on you, because that would be silly and you already said it was fun. Mal, imagine that 100+ rep, 100 upgrade mech batt jumping on your big, hd only city in Ghost. While that hd only city usually lets you run around attacking people three times your size because it's insanely costly to the point of near impossibility for another level 7 or 8 to take that zone. Buuuuuut, TWG has 400 billion nev cash....So how much of your city would die then? But, that would be fair because JGL could jump on someone else with a level 7 one big hg only city empire and do the same thing to THEM. That evens it all out and makes everyone happy.
So, let's all stop complaining that we all don't get each other, because it's stupid and I'm tired of reading the same arguement in different words in different posts. Let's do something a lot more constructive, okay?
-Upgrades need to go. Now. First. Before anything else even.
-Walls need to disappear. SOI auto claim, one city empires non city zones claimable/attackable, whatever. Needs to happen.
-Wars need to be undoable. End war button needs to come back.
Now for the constructive part.....What do YOU think needs to be done to the game before opening up everything would make a lick of sense? Surely with how much you want to meld old and new you can see that all these changes you want would destroy the game with newer things such as upgrades existing in old neveron?
Now all y'all shut up about each other not getting whatever you're not getting and start making suggestions that need to be done ASAP, not eventually or it would be fun to get to. Don't make me have to try and make sense again or there will be hell to pay. >:|
--------------------
...my bed was on fire once. I blame the gnomes.
|
GwB
Private
Reged: 11/30/08
Posts: 47
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Gunner]
#163147 - 12/31/11 08:38 PM (71.142.210.250)
|
|
|
Quote:
Gunner
But you goddamn well better believe if a level 6 with a Rhino is hitting one of my guys that has market mechs, I'm going to drop in and we're going to see how he likes fighting when my Ostroc batt is caving his cockpit in.
that is exactly what I dont want happening! I could careless about the value of my force, if 2 ants fight and one ant calls an anteater over and annihilates the lonely ant thats @#$&ed. Maybe a medium is reqiured there, I dont want to see any emp 2 times or more larger HD on any smaller emp but land attacks could be tolerable. walls need to stay! maybe not completely closed HD zones but Walls have to stay. theres no way I would stand for a 9 surround and cut off a 7 which has 5x less total value.
|
Dee
Sergeant Major
Reged: 02/15/06
Posts: 248
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: GwB]
#163148 - 12/31/11 08:44 PM (184.171.199.45)
|
|
|
awww kato's posts are gone as is my reply....
In short: I want close to what you guys want, I just don't want to get there half assed like most things in neveron's history.
Not quite what I was wanting to say, but it'll do as i don't feel like trying to type it again.
--------------------
...my bed was on fire once. I blame the gnomes.
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Dee]
#163149 - 12/31/11 11:43 PM (70.173.25.223)
|
|
|
So i am right in saying that if I were to start making a name for myself, by killing smaller empires, you would in fact drop on me, wiether or not I started the fight? I am supposed to embrace this with open arms? Where is the fun in this? Why would i donate unless im a level 12 or so?
Lets see. You would be trying to defend you faction mates, but yet I dont see anything about hitting that same empire with an empire or two of the same level. I just see that you would drop on me to kill any forces because you didnt have anything the same level that could. I would think that helping them build an empire properly would avoid being hit.
Now war is the biggest part of the game, and losses are to be expected. I dp a rhino and start killing empires for infra struture to become a large empire, but you are saying I cannt war with your farm empires to do so. Where is that fun?
You hate when people use the hate hoc speach, but yet this sort of attitude may explain why people hated it soo much. How many people left the game because it wasnt fun for them? As long as you were having fun, it didnt matter who left. How much money was donated only to have someone crush your forces because you didnt have the level 12 or so empire to avoid being dropped on? Again, where is the fun in this?
|
KJI_3x6
Lieutenant
Reged: 09/11/06
Posts: 650
Loc: Minnesota, North Korea
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: ghostrider]
#163152 - 01/01/12 12:26 AM (75.72.9.83)
|
|
|
actually there were instances of noobs being raped by huge empires.....
i know 2 seperate times bfore i figured out factions and what the **** i was doing, i got dropped by a 10 from, i think izw, and i don't remember the faction, but an 11 massacred me, and when i finally joined up havok told me to leave it be because it was a hoc faction, but this is not a bash on blah blah thing, i just wanted to point out in those 2 instances my level 1/2 empires did get randomly attacked by massive empires.
even saying that, the people now days who own larger empires are far more concerned with the future of nev and the bringing in of new players that i believe opening up restrictions back to how they were would be a huge improvement, along with the unfactioned list(or the easy target list).
--------------------
My d*** rumble in the jungle; your d*** got touched by your uncle.
My d*** double feature screen; your d*** went straight to dvd.
ME > you
|
Katrar
Major
Reged: 09/15/02
Posts: 1314
Loc: Seattle, WA USA, Terra
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: ghostrider]
#163153 - 01/01/12 05:58 AM (76.28.186.150)
|
|
|
Quote:
You hate when people use the hate hoc speach, but yet this sort of attitude may explain why people hated it soo much. How many people left the game because it wasnt fun for them? As long as you were having fun, it didnt matter who left. How much money was donated only to have someone crush your forces because you didnt have the level 12 or so empire to avoid being dropped on? Again, where is the fun in this?
/sigh
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Katrar]
#163155 - 01/01/12 09:35 AM (70.173.25.223)
|
|
|
I very much understand the problems of trying to deefend a faction mate, expecially from a dp ho or a completely tented, bv only emire. With omt, they need to dow before comming the hell out of units. I sat through more then a few faction mates getting run out of the game because of the politics of the game. 2 of them donated decently, and gave up as yet another empire dropped on them and got told the faction would die if anyone else got involved.
No, it wasnt hoc, so im not on the hate this alliance or that alliance. A few players i dislike, only because they do keep hitting the same empires over and over again with all their empires that are one level.
Now Im being told that people want to be able to drop empires 100 times my size on me, and I need to be quiet about it. This is not good for the game. As I said, how many people left the game from this sort of thing?
Bug abuse and hacking are considered illegal and wrong, yet how many times has it happened? You want things programmed so they cannt happen. Why? Because you dont want someone being able to use that against you. The game was good back when there wasnt just 2 sides. Now there is so few targets because of it.
The example of the rhino is a good one on how the game has become 'he who has the money, wins'. Which is why I have been trying to get this point of view into the light. Yes, it very much looks like this is an anti large empire train of thought. It isnt. It is we wont keep alot of new players in the game if it is 'join us or die'.
Now if the higher end levels or even some of the lower ones were a little closer, then maybe open it up to hitting one level below might work.
|
NeverSayNever
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 11/18/02
Posts: 1655
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Dee]
#163157 - 01/01/12 10:04 AM (78.50.242.15)
|
|
|
Wow, nice little rant, Dee, thanks.
Glad to see someone else took the time and dared to point out some serious flaws in some of the oldtimer's / veteran's rose colored 'visions' of the oh so great and glorious days of Neveron's colorful past.
By the way, for curiosity's sake, any alcohol (like in pints of beer consumed, or probably some New Year's champagne?) involved to help losen your tongue and strengthen your courage to post something, well, let's say: slightly less popular? Well, at least less popular among some of the old guard's players  ...
Anyway, Happy New Year!
Have a nice day / night.
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: NeverSayNever]
#163158 - 01/01/12 10:41 AM (184.1.118.183)
|
|
|
This is going nowhere fast. I cannot speak for the others but I can speak for myself. I was a small weak player who had no skill during that period of neveron. I had large empires dropped on me, I had border skirmishes, I was gangbanged, I saw it all. The best and the worst of old neveron. One of the worst things I ever saw in those days was the gangbang of colins empire, a lvl 10 I believe it was hit by 40+ empires at the same time. I saw noobs crushed. I was crushed as a noob. Old nev CLEARLY had huge problems. The concerns over noobs and independent factions, etc expressed here are all legit. Yet I still support a return to old neveron. Why?
The argument, from me at the very least, is that old neveron is a far better starting point. It was a superior gaming model by a factor of 10. The game was so dynamic. The markets were cheap, the wars ranged from tiny border disputes to massive wars of 1000s of players. And really, each individual war was more fun that a war today. You had actual battles all the time. Mech battles were common. But what of the weaknesses of old neveron?
I argue that you can use old neveron as a model and correct the weaknesses. You use old neveron as a model and then balance the game around THAT. It would be easier to balance the game really and make it more fun. Here are some of the things you can do to easily solve the problems of old neveron.
1. remove unfactioned list and top cities list to hide noobs.
2. make the markets cheaper again, possibly geared to be cheaper for new empires.
3. keep the current system of 2x cost increase for each dow. This rule didn't exist then. You could never have 40 on 1 GBs with this rule.
4. remove the ability for bigger empires to hit smaller empires unless hit first. Bam, all complaints gone and the freedom is huge.
5. keep the rule that battles end on surrender....there is no reason why we can't do this
The list can go on and on and on. The idea is simple: Use old neveron as a platform and than add in the good stuff of current neveron plus new ideas and systems to create a balanced system. It wouldn't be exactly old neveron, but it would be close enough, with all the freedoms and dynamic war situations and free flowing wars that old neveron brought with the good stuff of the new neveron.
For all the problems you can list for old neveron you can list so many more for current neveron. Currently the markets are extremely inflated in price, you have walls, tents, and cores in all sorts of combinations, super upgraded empires, towers are ridiculously powerful, skillups, soi mobing killing entire empires, etc etc etc etc. Noobs are probably doubly bad now than they were then too. The game has good stuff too, so lets take the good and add it to the superior game base that is old neveron. Why is this so hard to grasp? Old neveron has problems, new nev has more, lets use old neveron as the basis for the game and balance around THAT.
|
NeverSayNever
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 11/18/02
Posts: 1655
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: ghostrider]
#163159 - 01/01/12 10:45 AM (78.50.242.15)
|
|
|
The current "Level Structure" is not the most pressing problem, the real problem is the apparently still slowly shrinking playerbase.
The amount of available 'sand' (= players and their empires) in this PvP focused game keeps shrinking.
The introduction of more 'sieves' to help (re)distribute the shrinking amount of available 'sand' into a larger number of finely separated sub boxes (new empire level ranges) would not change the real issue (lack of 'sand' in general) and some people would keep on complaining about the lack of 'prey', err, 'targets', err, sorry, 'sand' in their little niche, err, sub sand boxes soon.
Have a nice day / night.
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: NeverSayNever]
#163160 - 01/01/12 10:50 AM (184.1.118.183)
|
|
|
That much is true. This discussion has been derailed from the original topic. I strongly oppose the new level structure. It just reduces the amount of targets. I would rather have some sort of penalty or handicap for the larger attacking empire. You break the empires up even more that helps very little.
|
Antaris
Sergeant
Reged: 11/05/05
Posts: 105
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Maghetti123]
#163161 - 01/01/12 11:18 AM (145.94.72.19)
|
|
|
In regards to a new level structure, currently it is a bad idea as the player base is just too small. However, if there were enough players I would support an adjusted level structure, though not as extreme as 1-50, maybe more 1-20. At a certain point the division is just too big, probably once you start getting above 6/7ish.
|
Katrar
Major
Reged: 09/15/02
Posts: 1314
Loc: Seattle, WA USA, Terra
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Maghetti123]
#163162 - 01/01/12 12:56 PM (76.28.186.150)
|
|
|
Quote:
This is going nowhere fast. I cannot speak for the others but I can speak for myself. I was a small weak player who had no skill during that period of neveron. I had large empires dropped on me, I had border skirmishes, I was gangbanged, I saw it all. The best and the worst of old neveron. One of the worst things I ever saw in those days was the gangbang of colins empire, a lvl 10 I believe it was hit by 40+ empires at the same time. I saw noobs crushed. I was crushed as a noob. Old nev CLEARLY had huge problems. The concerns over noobs and independent factions, etc expressed here are all legit. Yet I still support a return to old neveron. Why?
The argument, from me at the very least, is that old neveron is a far better starting point. It was a superior gaming model by a factor of 10. The game was so dynamic. The markets were cheap, the wars ranged from tiny border disputes to massive wars of 1000s of players. And really, each individual war was more fun that a war today. You had actual battles all the time. Mech battles were common. But what of the weaknesses of old neveron?
I argue that you can use old neveron as a model and correct the weaknesses. You use old neveron as a model and then balance the game around THAT. It would be easier to balance the game really and make it more fun. Here are some of the things you can do to easily solve the problems of old neveron.
1. remove unfactioned list and top cities list to hide noobs.
2. make the markets cheaper again, possibly geared to be cheaper for new empires.
3. keep the current system of 2x cost increase for each dow. This rule didn't exist then. You could never have 40 on 1 GBs with this rule.
4. remove the ability for bigger empires to hit smaller empires unless hit first. Bam, all complaints gone and the freedom is huge.
5. keep the rule that battles end on surrender....there is no reason why we can't do this
The list can go on and on and on. The idea is simple: Use old neveron as a platform and than add in the good stuff of current neveron plus new ideas and systems to create a balanced system. It wouldn't be exactly old neveron, but it would be close enough, with all the freedoms and dynamic war situations and free flowing wars that old neveron brought with the good stuff of the new neveron.
For all the problems you can list for old neveron you can list so many more for current neveron. Currently the markets are extremely inflated in price, you have walls, tents, and cores in all sorts of combinations, super upgraded empires, towers are ridiculously powerful, skillups, soi mobing killing entire empires, etc etc etc etc. Noobs are probably doubly bad now than they were then too. The game has good stuff too, so lets take the good and add it to the superior game base that is old neveron. Why is this so hard to grasp? Old neveron has problems, new nev has more, lets use old neveron as the basis for the game and balance around THAT.
That's been said many times Mags, especially by me. Old Nev isn't intended to be the end goal. It's a better place to start fixing Nev. If Nev is "fixed" along current lines, why bother playing, it will just be a more structured, boring, linear, brain dead, community-less game than it is now.
Old Nev had huge problems, but it also had a brighter future. The only reason anyone is suggesting the game go back to those systems is, as has been said many times before, here and in chat, because it is a more solid foundation upon which to move into the future. A future that addresses all the things brought up here, but retains the special spark that made Neveron popular in the first place.
I seriously have no idea why its so freaking hard for some people to get that through their thick freaking skulls.
--------------------
HoC Gaming - Come war with us!
The HoC Archive - Neveron's definitive historical document
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Katrar]
#163164 - 01/01/12 10:30 PM (70.173.25.223)
|
|
|
Ok mags and all the rest.
I have always agreed that an empire should be able to defend itself from any other empire, no matter the empire level. A level 9 raids a level 10, that 10 should more then be able to dow and hit the 9. That was never an issue with me. Its the ability for someone with a high level to just drop on any empire they are upset with that has me saying no.
I agree with most of the rest. Noobs should never show up on the list unless it is from another noob, but with the hunters on the island, this will not work well. That much i agree with. As for all other empires, having cities show up means there is a target for people to strike back when they are dowed. I dont have several copies of the map in memory, and dont have the time to spend hours searching for cities of an empire that just attacked me. My impression from people wanting to remove those lists are ones that dont want to defend anything and want put most if not all their bv in an attack force.
Now. There is no where in this discussion that said the older version of nev was so horrible that it couldnt be used as a base. It has been stated some of the bigger issues with old nev that should NOT be allowed to return.
Using a few arguements on themselves. People say they paid good money to build up the mega cores, and zones over 1k. It is my impession they do NOT want anyone else making the mega cores. Most of the same people are saying they should be allowed to dump an empire on somoene that just dped a rhino or what ever and probably a perfect pilot with a batt of units that are probably better gunned then the rhino. Not everyone has a stable full of units that are 2 or better to draw from. Now this person will be screwed out of their dp just because someone else had a large empires to hunt it down.
It is also my impression that anything that might level the playing field is considered extremely bad for the game, but yet those issues that were bad for the game in the past, have magically become something that needs to be kept.
Maybe going back to the days when an empire could have 9k worth of attack bv in a 500 pop empire would make it fun for those that have the backing to do it. Maybe keeping those 9k hidden in the middle of a level 13 and have hundreds of zones you need to hit in order to surrender that person would be good. Oh wait, that sounds an awful lot like tenting.. Or surround that 500 pop center in the level 13 so only someone willing to risk their level 12/13 to hit those zones, so you can strike at them, but the fl is only level 8.. well that sounds alot like the one cities walls.
guess im just extremely slow and stupid.
|
DeathStar
Corporal
Reged: 02/05/11
Posts: 59
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: ghostrider]
#163167 - 01/01/12 11:45 PM (74.196.239.46)
|
|
|
I will say ONE LAST TIME. If im an attacker, I have the initiative. If I can see a list of all your cities, I am going to start from the BOTTOM up. I am looking for BV for juicy skillchecks since the maintenance program isnt available to me anymore like it used to be. IF I CANT SEE YOU OR DONT KNOW YOU EXIST THEN I PROBABLY WILL ONLY ATTACK MY NEIGHBORS!
Ok thats out,
seriously its so very very simple....
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: DeathStar]
#163168 - 01/02/12 12:46 AM (184.1.118.183)
|
|
|
Annnd just deleted my post by accident. Lets try this again... First I will start by saying that your hangups on the details is unnecessary. The idea of using old neveron as a frame work for future game design and balancing means that any one detail or structure can be removed or altered in some way.
1. You talk about having issues with bigger empires attacking smaller empires and you agree in removing the ability for an empire to attack down unprovoked. Honestly, I feel we can balance the game and still have this ability, but there is much more to old nev than this so it can easily be given up. Again, old neveron is the framework.
2. You can fix the noob hunter thing easily by putting a limit on how long an empire can be on noob island.
3. "My impression from people wanting to remove those lists are ones that dont want to defend anything and want put most if not all their bv in an attack force." I have to quote this because it tells me you are not approaching this discussion in a very good manner. You seem to think we're a bunch of noob hunters out to get you and it is clearly muddying your opinions on these things a great deal. You cannot in any way build an empire around the city list not being present. Any empire that regularly attacks and is noteworthy on a grander scale in neveron is going to be mapped out by all sorts of people. Searching the map is actually pretty easy to do too. It makes it hard to find tiny obscure empires, but bigger empires that are all over the place can still be found. The only reason it would be time consuming is if SM didn't fix the maps. lvl 3 maps can find empires quickly. This just gives noobs a bit of extra protection. You cannot be taken seriously and think this of all proposed changes is people being greedy...seriously.
4. You implied your opposed to old nev in all your writings.
5. This is a good argument. If mega cores are going to be kept I say we return the ability to make them, old dp rates and the ability to dp up nonbuildables. Of course this would be a terrible idea but it would be fair. I support breaking up cores personally, and I have several of them myself.
6. In gunners example you are missing the key point. An empire is attacking someones faction. If someone takes that rhino and attacks with it, it is fair game, not someone being "screwed out of their dp." With that said, There is an obvious problem with this, and it isn't that a bigger empire could attack a smaller empire, it is that not all alliances and players have their own big empire to save them. Even though the ability to attack down makes the game much more dynamic, ultimately this reason makes me question this ability. Perhaps there is a way to have our cake and eat it too with some fancy game design, but we will see.
7. "It is also my impression that anything that might level the playing field is considered extremely bad for the game, but yet those issues that were bad for the game in the past, have magically become something that needs to be kept." Yet again, you are engaging us like we want to eat your empires, this is not fair and is muddying your view of the proposals made here. No one want to keep things we consider bad for the game. Many of the things removed from the game were amazing for the game. Some of those things have problems, but we can fix those problems. No reason why we can't make the old systems work in a more balanced way. Either engage with the assumption all parties involved have neverons best interests in mind and not their own or leave the discussion.
8. Small empires being able to have pure bv empires was never a bad thing. I was the noobiest noob and my small empires were pure bv. This was not some advantage veterans only held. It just meant smaller empires were stronger in those days than they are now. lvl 0-2s all look pretty funny because of the small armies. But there is also no issue with just keeping omt around with the old framework so I don't see the issue here...
9. No one supports tent city empires in any form. All this stuff is addressed by something SM already supports and talks of doing. That is the concept of home zones. Moving an empire into one area and charging them extra to have land outside this area. Then you have forced claim soi. Even still you will have empires small enough to hide in another empires soi..but that exists now. At least with the ability to attack up in levels or attack with no war declared as it used to be you have some way to get to those hidden empires. Right now there is nothing.
Seriously Ghostrider, these players are not out to kill the small guy, they have the long term future of the game in mind and you need to accept that. You may have different ideas on what should be done but attacking your opponent as greedy isn't constructive at all.
|
GwB
Private
Reged: 11/30/08
Posts: 47
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Maghetti123]
#163171 - 01/02/12 01:17 AM (71.142.210.250)
|
|
|
on this attacking down issue, if there are preset levels of responce based on damage done during the smaller empire attack I can live with any level attacking me after I just taken a zone from it
I dont support the Home Zone idea, raise LM but I dont like the Idea. I like walls, not so much tents but walls should stay, the walling emp should have to pay severe penelties for each wall zone. none city zones not within your soi and remote citys should be costly as well, limit one city zones to a minimal number.
|
TRK
Sergeant Major
Reged: 11/05/02
Posts: 254
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: GwB]
#163183 - 01/03/12 09:40 AM (173.181.67.112)
|
|
|
Everyone's points are moot. Every single one. Mine too.
Why?
We need an admin that can do stuff.
Flogging the dead horse of a forum is only causing a greater rift in the player base and false hope.
|
Tigre
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 02/10/03
Posts: 1833
Loc: Atlanta, GA
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: TRK]
#163184 - 01/03/12 11:59 AM (216.130.147.106)
|
|
|
Nobody is addressing the login issue? How many people seriously have 1 login with 5 empires they log into? (well, I do, but I also have about 30 secondary logins where I manage an empire.) I know of people with 3 or 4 logins. . . How about fixing the empire limit, clearing out the dead empires, etc?
Super alliances weren't around in the old days as much, remember when HoC, LIFE, WoB, the Clans, etc. were ALL players? (Before Nimon bought anything, and was just the owner of a level 8 empire in the KizoKuin faction run by Jakre). . . Politics meant more then. I came up in that era, helped by people who ran over my empire, talked to me in battle chat and DR's (before I discovered irc even) and helped me become a good pilot and build good empires.
By fixing the "pilot login" system so you can only do just that, pilot, and require the empire owner to be present for other things, and use better security protocols to prevent main login sharing and abuse (and "vacation mode") you start to fix the problems I see with Nev today.
--------------------
- Tigre
Ipsa Scientia Potestas Est
- Francis Bacon
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: Tigre]
#163189 - 01/03/12 12:52 PM (70.173.25.223)
|
|
|
I believe that was mentioned in another thread about people owning more then 5 empires.
That is one of the issues with the walls and such. People will say they are holding them for other players. Then they say they are owned by no one, but yet still seem to profit from the walls, money shipments as well as being used to take and hold property taken in battle to avoid the defender from being able to get it back without having to fight 2 or more empires. Most noob hunters have 5 empires on the mainland and use an alt log in to kill the fresh empires.
I have stated that there are now basically 2 sides in the political arena, and that is part of whats causing the lack of targets.
But what do I know. Im just here to say the emporer is wearing no cloths, and being told Im just blind.
|
KJI_3x6
Lieutenant
Reged: 09/11/06
Posts: 650
Loc: Minnesota, North Korea
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: ghostrider]
#163193 - 01/03/12 05:29 PM (75.72.9.83)
|
|
|
the empire limit thing is 100% right. i have ONE login, and i have 4 empires. i don;t even have the aloted 5, and all of them are 2 and under. one thing to wonder about is why anyone with a browser that isn't ancient has to sit and wait for 30 seconds after they pick the empire to login to. wasn't this stupid thing intended to make it harder to have multiple logins and excessive empires? on the same note, how much memory does this worthless thing cache? i am no tech guy, but that whole "feature" is **** stupid and an absolute waste of time, and possibly hard drive resources.
--------------------
My d*** rumble in the jungle; your d*** got touched by your uncle.
My d*** double feature screen; your d*** went straight to dvd.
ME > you
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: KJI_3x6]
#163205 - 01/04/12 09:32 PM (49.225.12.118)
|
|
|
9. No one supports tent city empires in any form. All this stuff is addressed by something SM already supports and talks of doing. That is the concept of home zones. Moving an empire into one area and charging them extra to have land outside this area. Then you have forced claim soi. Even still you will have empires small enough to hide in another empires soi..but that exists now. At least with the ability to attack up in levels or attack with no war declared as it used to be you have some way to get to those hidden empires. Right now there is nothing.
I support keeping the ability to create and maintain tents. I think there are better ways of dealing with the problem. My personal prefered option would be to make HDs free, and charge war costs again. Tents would be very cheap and easy to attack, while big cities would be very expensive.
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Level Structure
[Re: buc]
#163206 - 01/04/12 10:09 PM (184.1.118.183)
|
|
|
Tents are possible. The cost is more for having zones outside your core, making tents impractical. You would end up with a home zones type of area and then some amount of zones if you please elsewhere. It is a good solution.
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
