Katrar
Major
Reged: 09/15/02
Posts: 1314
Loc: Seattle, WA USA, Terra
|
Ideal Mech Costs and Availability (Also SoI Discussion)
#157707 - 03/02/10 07:15 PM (67.170.89.133)
|
|
|
Mech costs are the other half of the problem with regards to there being so little mech combat in Neveron today. When a single decent medium or heavy mech can take weeks to save up for, and an assault mech months, it really squashes any realistic expectation that the everyday non donating emp will use them.
I recommend that a total NASI reset be enacted, along with a mineral price readjustment to suit.
Average light mechs are currently on the market at 50-60 million each. That's NASI prices.
Until early 2004 you used to be able to buy a decent light for about 8-10 million. A good assault was about 100-120m. This was in a game that had more large empires than we do now, and an order of magnitude more empires in general. When people fought and their stuff died it was traumatic but you knew you could bounce back within a few weeks, at lower levels, and even have some decent mechs to play with. Try getting wiped out a level 5 or 6 these days. Unless you DP you are pretty much done, it would take a year or more of sitting and doing nothing but saving (and hoping you didn't get hit again) just to buy a mech or three.
So I'm going to suggest that along with the previously mentioned advantages of bringing back out of DoW attacks, LC costs and other cash outlays for war, that we also drastically reduce the cost of mechs and vehicles in game. If NASI drops everything at a resonable cost, but significantly higher than a manufacturer could reasonably profit, bang... there's your mech combat.
Something like:
Avg light mech... 15m
Avg medium mech... 25m
Avg heavy mech... 60m
Avg assault mech... 120m
Perhaps a particular light mech could be manufactured for a price of 8m, and if placed on the market at 12m it stills makes a good profit while underselling NASI.
The biggest possible objection to this of course is the amount of money in the game. Yes there is a lot of money in the game, but really if you think about it from one end to the other... is that really objectionable? If people could afford tons of mechs, and began using them again, doesn't that just make the game MORE FUN? And regardless if one side or the other has a short term advantage in terms of cash savings, wouldn't it be expended at a quicker pace if mechs were again worth buying, and wouldn't cheap mechs make it that much less painful to get your army wiped out to begin with?
I strongly feel that in conjunction with many of the system reversions back to old ways that we have discussed, cheap mechs need to be a part of the solution.
And to finish I'll just add that "cheap mechs" is a term used only in context of modern prices. Back when a Locust was 4 million, but empires still made the same as they do now on pop+commercials, a 100 million Imp was indeed considered expensive. People were careful with their 100 million nevdollar Imps in the same way we are careful with our 1.6 billion nevdollar Imps. They just didn't despair as much when theirs died. Nowadays, if you don't have DP or a massive cash reserve, you simply are not replacing that mech. Period.
--------------------
HoC Gaming - Come war with us!
The HoC Archive - Neveron's definitive historical document
Edited by Katrar (03/03/10 02:39 AM)
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: Katrar]
#157708 - 03/02/10 07:24 PM (210.86.1.168)
|
|
|
Nice post Kato.
Make war more expensive and rebuilding far cheaper and easier.
|
Katrar
Major
Reged: 09/15/02
Posts: 1314
Loc: Seattle, WA USA, Terra
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: buc]
#157709 - 03/02/10 07:29 PM (67.170.89.133)
|
|
|
Exactly.
When it's all put together, the unbelievable condition of modern Nev really screams out at you. They really did take something great and smash it in to the ground, for no reason other than greed and ignorance. It's quite stunning.
--------------------
HoC Gaming - Come war with us!
The HoC Archive - Neveron's definitive historical document
Edited by Katrar (03/02/10 07:33 PM)
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: buc]
#157710 - 03/02/10 07:34 PM (67.236.132.187)
|
|
|
I would like to add that today war can be VERY expensive, but not from actually fighting. Mob costs from SOI cripple empires with costs. My recent very one sided lvl 9 war must have cost 6 billion, and almost allof this came from soi surrounding costs. But yeah, I much rather pay for actually fighting, than pay to be surrounded and mobbed for days, rediculous system.
As far as the mech market goes, I totally agree with you. The argument about the money in the game is a very weak one. People will get a short advantage at first, but so what, if people can buy mechs and use them with out fearing if some die they will never be replaced, we can see some actual mech combat for a change. I stopped buying mechs long ago because of the prices, I have only bought maybe 24 total mechs in the last 2 or so years over all the empires i have, because its a joek to spend such high prices on them.
I would argue that the mechs should be a little bit cheaper than the prices you listed if anything, maybe:
Avg light mech... 8m
Avg medium mech... 20m
Avg heavy mech... 50m
Avg assault mech... 100m
or soemthing, but ill be happy with your numbers as well:P.
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: Maghetti123]
#157711 - 03/02/10 07:43 PM (210.86.1.168)
|
|
|
One way would be to reduce the cost while increasing the numbers of mechs dropped over a period of time. +/- 20% per week or month or whatever. rather than one day an imp is 2bil and the next its 200 mil
there are mechs that should be rare, and should be grabbed by the first person to see it, rather than the first person with 2 bil in their back pocket to see it
|
Rodon
Sergeant
Reged: 01/04/08
Posts: 146
Loc: Augusta, Ga
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: Maghetti123]
#157712 - 03/02/10 07:46 PM (72.10.89.206)
|
|
|
Every single thing on the market should be returned to owner and NASI replace all of it at reasonable prices. New caps should be set and anyone pricing over that cap should have 100% of those excess profits taxed away.
All BT canon mechs should be available on the market.
|
Rodon
Sergeant
Reged: 01/04/08
Posts: 146
Loc: Augusta, Ga
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: Rodon]
#157714 - 03/02/10 07:51 PM (72.10.89.206)
|
|
|
Quote:
Every single thing on the market should be returned to owner and NASI replace all of it at reasonable prices. New caps should be set and anyone pricing over that cap should have 100% of those excess profits taxed away.
All BT canon mechs should be available on the market.
Errr, that is level 1 tech, basic configuration.
|
Katrar
Major
Reged: 09/15/02
Posts: 1314
Loc: Seattle, WA USA, Terra
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: buc]
#157715 - 03/02/10 07:58 PM (67.170.89.133)
|
|
|
@buc: Well to be honest one thing about the mech market is it is fragile. Randy/WWS never touched it (except once to jack prices up) because they were afraid to touch it, so I'm assuming that anything thats done should probably be done in one swoop. That said, if its a corrective action there really shouldn't be any issue with 2b one day, 200m the next.
And Mags, I would be happy to see the prices even lower than that. I'd be happy with 5m Locusts, or 2m Locusts.
I think that there would be a massive flurry of mech buying for the first few weeks, but after a few months the game would begin to restabilize with an adjusted mentality on war.
And on SOI, TOTALLY AGREE. I'll be straight, if SoI does not get completely yanked, I will not continue to play. SoI is the worst system ever devised on Neveron. It makes me sick to think of all the hundreds, possibly thousands of empires SoI has single handedly strangled to death.
--------------------
HoC Gaming - Come war with us!
The HoC Archive - Neveron's definitive historical document
Edited by Katrar (03/02/10 07:58 PM)
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: Katrar]
#157716 - 03/02/10 08:05 PM (67.236.132.187)
|
|
|
The very first words on my #1 desire for neveron says "Kill the SOI system". I probably wouldn't quit, but the level of outrage and disappointment would be massive if soi stays.
And for the mech prices, I would be happy with that too, let noobs buy some actual mechs.
And for the changes to the market, you got to clean sweep the market off all at once, put in the new places as suggested by kato, and have a system where if mechs are not being bought after a certain period of time they are taken off the list so not to completely clutter the market with stuff people are not buying.
|
Rodon
Sergeant
Reged: 01/04/08
Posts: 146
Loc: Augusta, Ga
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: Maghetti123]
#157717 - 03/02/10 08:22 PM (72.10.89.206)
|
|
|
Wish someone would explain to me whatever the alternate to SOI is, so perhaps I can understand what is so wrong with it. With no SOI wouldn't you be able to fill any and every zone with 216 units? Wouldn't that be nearly as bad?
|
KJI_3x6
Lieutenant
Reged: 09/11/06
Posts: 650
Loc: Minnesota, North Korea
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: Rodon]
#157719 - 03/02/10 11:38 PM (71.193.82.44)
|
|
|
Quote:
And for the mech prices, I would be happy with that too, let noobs buy some actual mechs.
YES! god forbid people join a game based on battletech and actually be able to buy a mech within a few days. noobs don't get excited by jeeps and hunters, they get excited by giant fucking robots that can blow the shit out of stuff.
Quote:
Wish someone would explain to me whatever the alternate to SOI is, so perhaps I can understand what is so wrong with it. With no SOI wouldn't you be able to fill any and every zone with 216 units? Wouldn't that be nearly as bad?
if soi has remained unchanged since i stoppedp laying, the point is if a zone with a max garrison gets soi'd all of a sudden empires are paying WAY more than what they can afford in mob costs and all of a sudden your 3 bill is -25mil in 2 days with no way out of it. another hting, soi in many ways actually encourages endless tent cities, why would a small level emp have say a 6x6 area of land sitting there with 1 or 2 cities and everything they own there, if you build the way that works, your garbage bv gets mob'd and bang, youre paying. instead you got 200 zones scattered all over, so you throw some jeeps in a few 1 pop cities and keep your real bv hidden in some 3 zone island surounded by a level 10.
--------------------
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: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: Rodon]
#157721 - 03/03/10 02:25 AM (67.170.89.133)
|
|
|
Quote:
Wish someone would explain to me whatever the alternate to SOI is, so perhaps I can understand what is so wrong with it. With no SOI wouldn't you be able to fill any and every zone with 216 units? Wouldn't that be nearly as bad?
It's a fair question, Rodon.
Most every system in Neveron had a predecessor, and it's true that many of the changes older players are hoping to see are inspired by the function of these older systems. Not all of them, of course, old Nev had its problems too.
But not all systems had a predecessor. SoI is one of those systems.
SoI went into effect in April of 2006. Ironically, its advertised purpose was to encourage players to build in one main area, discouraging empires spread all over the map.
It needs to be said, before I continue, that in 2006 there was no crisis of spread out empires on Neveron. There was no such thing as a tent empire, for instance. Any empire that was spread out existed in such a form solely due to the spoils of war. Randy and WWS's desire to crack down on spread out empires came out of the blue, and had no stabilizing or corrective quality to it at all.
WWS's assertions in April of that year were that SoI would make players fight harder for their home zones, resulting in more mech fights. Mech fights had been on the decline for 2 years due to the introduction of towers, IDF and ABR, but Randy and WWS of course refused to acknowledge this pattern that we all recognize today.
However, rather than concentrate empires SoI had the entirely opposite effect of spawning the much hated (and rightly so) tent city strategy. Why? Mob costs. Concentrated empires often did not have the SoI necessary to house adequate defenses, and a concentrated empire soon became a huge liability.
So empire owners were left with really one choice if they wanted a truly defensible empire in "New Nev"... to tent to hell and back, and hope their mechs could stay hidden somewhere without the adequate defenses that would invariably auto mob and bankrupt them. It's no coincidence that the fortress strategy has another name these days... the noob strategy.
SoI induced mobilization did something far worse to damaged, broke empires, though. It made them unplayable, and unsalvageable. What are your choices in an SoI compromised empire once you reach negative funds? That's right, you have no choices.
So what SoI does is enforce tents, punish alternate empire strategies, actively bankrupt empires and then make them unplayable and unrecoverable when they hit -1 nev funds.
This brutal reality was an unintended consequence, but it has been the reality of SoI for near four years. Neveron has always been a rather harsh mistress. Empires disappearing overnight, stuff like that. But SoI is clinically brutal, and for no real reason beyond the fact of its existence.
You asked the question, "With no SoI wouldn't you be able to fill any and every zone with 216 units? Wouldn't that be nearly as bad?"
It's a thoroughly modern question, one that springs from an assumption that being able to fit 216 units in any zone is inherently bad.
I submit that it is not bad. And it never was. Yes, the old system allowed players to build where they wanted, and defend the best they could afford.
Players can only have as many units as they can afford, and if they wish to distribute them in a fort, across a frontier, or anything in between, that was always their choice. There were benefits and drawbacks of every type of empire.
But mobilization of units exceeding SoI was not even in the original plan for Sphere of Influence. SoI was originally intended to do nothing more than limit the number of units that could be shipped into a zone. It was intended to model carrying capacity, not enforce mobilization. Public criticism prompted Randy and WWS to change their tune... mobilized units would be allowed in to defend any zone. This of course opened up the potential for abuse, IE mob'ing units, moving them to a zone, and demob'ing them. Then came the bandaid... forced mobilization.
They didn't think it through from one end to the other. They didn't model it out. They just thought it up one day, changed it the next, implemented it, then let it sit unchanged for the next four years. And we've been paying the price ever since.
Of course SoI wasn't the first ill thought out system implemented on Neveron. Nor the first to be implemented and then ignored. It was to our collective misfortune that the game basically lost its admin a year later. But SoI has easily been the most damaging system in Nev history. The unintended consequences of SoI have been numerous and dire. Tent cities. Economic ruin. The model that was SoI... civilization-like areas of influence on a living map... that was a dream that never made it off the paper it was typed on.
--------------------
HoC Gaming - Come war with us!
The HoC Archive - Neveron's definitive historical document
Edited by Katrar (03/03/10 02:26 AM)
|
Katrar
Major
Reged: 09/15/02
Posts: 1314
Loc: Seattle, WA USA, Terra
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: Katrar]
#157722 - 03/03/10 02:34 AM (67.170.89.133)
|
|
|
I want to add this...
Goal: To more limit the scope of war to create a more 'fair' player vs player environment, and to pit like-powered empires against like-powered empires in a way that simplifies gameplay.
That was WWS's stated goal in the implementation of SoI. I have to ask you all, especially those that experienced Neveron pre and post SoI... did SoI accomplish any of these goals? Did it more limit the scope of war? Did it create a more fair player versus player environment? (The irony in that one is difficult to swallow) Did it simplify gameplay?
By those 3 standards alone SoI has been an ABJECT FAILURE.
--------------------
HoC Gaming - Come war with us!
The HoC Archive - Neveron's definitive historical document
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: Katrar]
#157723 - 03/03/10 03:28 AM (67.236.132.187)
|
|
|
I would like to add to what Kato said, he is of course 100% right about the problems of soi, but Rodon also wanted to know what you replace soi with.
Before we had soi, there was no system with a name like lw or dueling that encapsulated a bunch of varying things. What soi did was add more things to the game, just things that were of no benefit. People seem to have a hard time understanding that some things do not need to be added, and you do not have to replace one thing with another. Just because you remove stone rhinos doesn't mean you need a different type of super mech to replace it.
With soi, it means your cities have area control of surrounding land with population. It means you can force claim enemy land. It means you can can't have more troops in a zone than your area control allows otherwise those extra troops would be automatically mobilized. It means that if your city or your enemies city has their soi cut off they will gain massive mob costs just for having troops in a city. It also allows unattackable walling, and if you dow a empire to remove its walling, you have to surrender that empire just to get that walling.
Without soi, you get read of the city control of an area, you get rid of troops being force mobbed, and the need to control a certain amount of zones around your city to defend it the way you want too.
It is critical though that you add in the ability to attack a any zone with out a dow, and the ability to end wars peacefully with out recking them. If you removed soi and kept attacking how it is, you make walling even more powerful, but if you allow any zone to be attacked, walling can still be used, certainly, it is not forcing someone to remove them, but it gives you the option to clear those walls.
Though, I personally will only use empires to wall off the borders and not surround cities anymore if these changes come into effect, and will require the same of those who are in my alliance as a standard of fair play.
oh, and to address the 216unit thing, though this is an advantage, and certainly annoying, it becomes less effective if you also decrease the price of mechs, and remove or change how abr works. garbage tanks are only used as much as they are as a counter to the tank warfare that has covered neveron. 216 hunters at 6 gun can be killed in a few hours by a company of mechs, their only true strength is abr and fighting other tanks and towers. I imagine you will see a lot more big bved tanks in the future because it will no longer be about swarming tanks at each other, but rather mechs fighting mech, and tanks fighting mech as the mech show of war.
Also, 216 units is only a major advantage when you have unattackable walls. If you can focus your enemy through a funnel into them, it works great, if they can surround that zone and attack from multi directions, not as much.
eh, this is good enough :P.
edit: I ment to add that stealth towers were what allowed low level empires to function, because of the amount of bv fielded by smaller empires, you can find your self dead very quickly, but with some stealth towers between you and your enemy, you have the chance of responding in time, this is another thing that along side soi pushed empires into tenting, so i view it as important to allow side removing soi, make this a standard tactic again for the sake of smaller empires, meaning to fix abr to make them not useless.
Edited by Maghetti123 (03/03/10 03:41 AM)
|
Katrar
Major
Reged: 09/15/02
Posts: 1314
Loc: Seattle, WA USA, Terra
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: Maghetti123]
#157724 - 03/03/10 03:33 AM (67.170.89.133)
|
|
|
+1 Mags hit all the points I missed.
--------------------
HoC Gaming - Come war with us!
The HoC Archive - Neveron's definitive historical document
|
mattbuck
Eeyore
Reged: 02/13/04
Posts: 3285
Loc: Nottingham, UK
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: Katrar]
#157728 - 03/03/10 07:14 AM (128.243.253.112)
|
|
|
I don't think SOI is entirely bad - the idea of force claiming zones has merits - but on the whole it's horrible.
--------------------
Haha, you people think admins still look at these forums.
Visit the Platonian! Updated! Stuff! Things! Click!
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: mattbuck]
#157732 - 03/03/10 12:43 PM (125.237.151.30)
|
|
|
New caps should be set and anyone pricing over that cap should have 100% of those excess profits taxed away.
No way. If someone wants to try and charge far too much for something, thats fine. There are others that will willingly charge less.
Remove SOI, and remove auto ABR. auto ABR is a TERRIBLE addition. It also caused the need to tent out emps and hide your bv. You have no way to effectivly stall your enemy now like you used to with stealth towers and stuff.
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: buc]
#157737 - 03/03/10 03:05 PM (67.236.132.187)
|
|
|
Buc, so long as the market isn't setup where one person selling a mech for 200mil forces another person to also sell far higher, the 70-200% system would be a bad idea to keep.
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: Maghetti123]
#157738 - 03/03/10 03:21 PM (210.86.1.168)
|
|
|
Agreed. I actually respoded to Rodon in Chat and said the exact same thing. maybe some sort of Absolute mins but not sure if that is needed.
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: buc]
#158150 - 03/27/10 04:02 AM (70.170.54.41)
|
|
|
soi was put in as a 'fix' for hd only empires. I have seen the old ways that allowed people with a level 3 empire to own little pop and have the bv of a normal level 5. for those with the empires to fund these types, its fun for you. being a late comer, i can tell you that being on the other end is one of the things that drives away the newer people.
part of the problem i can see is people do not want to put in the proper units for defense. instead of hundreds of 8 gun hunters, maybe try a batt of 4 gun lrm ontos. If the ai was better, the need to defend with hordes of crappy gunned units wouldnt be as bad, though some people would abuse it just to do so. hmmm. maybe thats a big key to this. a better ai means that better units would be worth it.
I suggest basing soi on the cf of cities. this means single hd only zones would mob anything in there. large cities would have less if any units being mobbed. this would also help curb the tent city problem since units in the little cities would get mobbed without having to be found by all.
I definately agree that the prices on everything is horrible. trying to rebuild without a rich empire funding and selling you the items you need make the game not worth playing. simply replacing a lance of jeeps can be expensive when you only have maybe 100k/nevday income. Setting a price cap on things should hold some of those costs down, but go another step further. have the game store drop items that players can make. This will help keep prices down, while still allowing people to buy items.
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: ghostrider]
#158156 - 03/27/10 04:06 PM (67.236.156.138)
|
|
|
SOI does nothing to fix HD only empires. As you should have noticed by now, they, and a lot of other empires designs equally as lame, are just as common today as before. The amount of bv/pop a empire controls is not based no soi, soi does not control ai. But yeah, HD only empires back in the day happened, and hd only cities today happen, the difference is today there is no way to get land next to that HD only empire. Turns out, that when you can use any empire to take land with out a dow, bigger empires can clear DZs for the empire wanting to attack the HD only empire.
Yes soi makes it harder to afford such an empire, but it does not stop them, and when one is put up, it is far harder to attack it in current neveron. The main group to use hd only city tactics was NC, where it would have a core, with all the faction's empires inside a lvl 12/13 that would dow the attacking empires if they tried to get land to hit the factions empires. Though this was extremely effective, guess what happened? It ended up being defeated by good preparation and coordination of empires, and this is something we do not see anymore. Back in the day it was not just possible but necessary to coordinate between empires to get DZs, to protect each other, etc, this was far more enjoyable.
Also worth noting that back in the day rebuilding was faaaar easier, so when you fought empires much stronger than your self, it was not as though you were unable to ever rebuild, mechs were cheap, tanks where cheap, and so was infra building.
SOI is a terible terrible system and is nothing any player should help to keep IMO.
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: Maghetti123]
#158170 - 03/28/10 07:11 PM (70.170.54.41)
|
|
|
was only suggesting on making soi auto mob units in the empire depending on city sizes. if it ran once every day, people would either go broke, or have to do something about increasing the city sizes to avoid constantly being mobbed.
I will play devils advocate with this a little. you say having a large empire drop and get an lz. that is great if you have an empire to do so, or know someone that will. not everyone in the game has that option. with a one city empire surrounding the hd only zone would be great to do so. one problem i can see is if the owner of the zone decided to take it back just as the smaller empire moved in its forces to attack, well that starts another problem. granted, it would cost a fortune since the original owner would not have controlled the zone for the 30 nev day cheap rehit.
and whats the difference with having a high level empire surrounding cities vs 2 empires of the same level? yeah you could try to hit both of the same level. if you dont, then the second empire can move in forces to hit the attackers right after they finish taking the first targets zone, or worse, hitting the retreating units. more then a few people have done this tactic already.
i dont see an easy or single fix for this situation, since it mainly depends on players not 'bending' the spirit of the game. I do agree that it wouldnt be as big of a problem if units were alot cheaper, but you will still have people that will constantly do it. maybe they should have neveron arms sales drop all types of units and keep the prices within a certain range. or set a max that cannot have anything set higher then that. one problem arises from that, being if resources are not fixed, then it is very possible making said items would run you into the ground from costs.
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: ghostrider]
#158176 - 03/29/10 02:54 AM (125.237.150.3)
|
|
|
SOI is crap. SP and OMT was put in to stop low pop : bv ratios not SOI
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: buc]
#158197 - 03/30/10 03:41 PM (70.170.54.41)
|
|
|
thought soi was put in to limit the amount of units someone could have in a zone that wasnt mobbed. the fact that they didnt have it run a zone check every day to mob units over the soi garrison was a fortunate oversight.
ok now i see what you are saying. it doesnt prevent hd only empires, just costs them to have more then x units. my mistake. i have a problem that sometimes i dont think things through.. hell maybe im admin material? 
anyway have the neveron arms sales sell items such as player made mechs at a set max price. every other item for sale should be less then this. this would mean nsa would not be underselling players, but still allow things to be on the market for sale when they do drop. Also having it drop items such as variants of player mechs, like the locust variants, or heaven forbid, the vindicator variants. If an item doesnt sell at a minimum set price, then drop them only as someone buys them. the market may have a bunch of unwanted mechs for sale for a while, but active admins should be able to clean it up once in a while.
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: ghostrider]
#158389 - 04/13/10 03:23 PM (70.170.54.41)
|
|
|
from the feeling i get from people, it seems everyone hates soi because it means that they have to own land around their cities and defend them zones as well to avoid lots of mob costs. it also means that having a batt of mechs in a single hd only zone will cost alot when they mob.
i think this is because people dont want to change this fact, and its costing them a fortune to continue with it.
i understand that alot of people have poured thousands of dollars into the game building up their forces, along with the time to do so. i havent figured away to get around this sort of problem thats gonna make anyone happy.
pulling soi just allows those that are established the ability to keep doing the same things, while limiting the newer players from having fun. being hit by an empire that has 300+ zones and almost all of them hd, is not fun for the recieving players point. when you own the empire with the zones and hitting an empire that has all of its pop/bv in one zone is awsome.
keeping soi means having to really balance it out, which seems highly unlikely, since most of the people that come here have the 5+ year old empires pretty well set up.
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: ghostrider]
#158411 - 04/14/10 01:27 AM (122.57.197.201)
|
|
|
You completely miss the point. No one is advocating pulling SOI out and leaving everything else the same. And I for one am not AT ALL hoping to keep all the HD problems. SOI is just a crappy system.
War costs, for eg, is a brilliant system. Non city zones are SUPER CHEAP to attack, with small tents not being much more. But the bigger cities become FAR more expensive to attack, thus encouraging people to build them. Id also suggest lowering the cost of HDs, but bringing back LC costs.
Attacking any level and without DOW is another system that ties in with war costs. A higher level empire attacking a lower level emp has a hugely increased cost, and a higher level emp hitting a city would be crazy costs. however, it removes (to a large degree) the power of walls.
Removing Forced ABR would also be included here, as it would enable people to actually defend a larger core area with smaller amounts of BV. Forced ABR was one of the magor reasons people started to tent and wall, because it became too hard to defend any other style. This will give people a chance to get online and organise counter attacks
The removal of IDF and multi-range towers, and the addition of SP to towers would create a far more mobile defencive system, and require active pilots rather than AI being king. Also the change of the big DP mechs and removal of upgrades would balance war.
So in conclusion, if anyone with an old (or new) emp wants to keep things, or change things purely for their own benifit, they are being selfish and dont have the best of this game in mind. I then would put far less weight on what they say. The changes I have suggested would effect my empires HUGELY and mean a great deal of effort to fix.
Edited by buc (04/14/10 01:27 AM)
|
mattbuck
Eeyore
Reged: 02/13/04
Posts: 3285
Loc: Nottingham, UK
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: buc]
#158426 - 04/14/10 02:07 PM (95.148.186.221)
|
|
|
Ghostrider, people aren't entirely anti-SOI - I would like to keep being able to claim zones near your cities from enemies. But the way it can kill empires is wrong, and it doesn't help stop tenting. What would stop tenting is removing 10* BV autoABR - that means that people can use stealth towers again, and return to having stallers. Stalling keeps battles out of cities, which means less city destruction.
War costs! Yes please! But not back to the very original system where it changed as you attacked - keep it so that empties cost 200k, and attack costs depend on cf not on % of an empire.
--------------------
Haha, you people think admins still look at these forums.
Visit the Platonian! Updated! Stuff! Things! Click!
|
Utopian
Sergeant
Reged: 02/18/05
Posts: 147
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: mattbuck]
#158429 - 04/14/10 02:12 PM (138.163.0.42)
|
|
|
I for one would return to playing Nev if SOI was scrapped as well as other changes like cheaper mechs and removing anti inf vehs.
Truth is, I miss the old nev. Sure it had issues even back then, but the way it is now is keeping me away.
--------------------
Neveron: A Story of Blood, Sweat and Beverages or: How I learned to stop worrying about Peel while enjoying my beer
http://mattbuck.irongalaxy.com/neveron/index.html
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: Utopian]
#158431 - 04/14/10 02:37 PM (70.170.54.41)
|
|
|
ok, i miss understood the motivation, since it looked like people wanted to throw it out completely. i understand that alot needs to change in order for things to work well again.
i suggested it before and will ask again. would it work if you raised the garrison limit?
i would suggest having it based on the cf of the city, ie. the larger the city, the more units could remain unmobbed.
might also suggest a cap on the number of units that will defend the city based on its cf as well.
this could also tie in with towers as well, also limiting the amount that can be placed based on the size as well.
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Ideal Mech Costs and Availability
[Re: ghostrider]
#158439 - 04/14/10 04:25 PM (210.86.1.168)
|
|
|
no ghostrider, that would not make me like it any more than i do now... auto-mob should be removed along with garrison limits.
Read again what i said about war costs and you'll see that will remove many tents far quicker than SOI crap.
The only thing i like about SOI is the ability to buy zones. Thats it. Nothing more.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
