Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Re-think dead is dead

2013-07-15T21:53:52+02:00

rkrempel wrote:
Even if so, will these remain static limits, or could it be something more complex.

I think I've already written that it will depend of how many players are in your factions, how many planets you know, and obviously how many high(er) ranked players you have.

Same for money generation.

an easy way to gain rank may be to tml your superior

Actually a viable way, as the last two ranks are reserved for 2 players only (and I've though of that while deciding it).

It's up to you to make your own dynamic.
There will be a manhunting function where you can put a price on the head of someone. Can be someone on your faction. You can even contact the enemy to trap him in a 3v3 where you fight against him.

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 15 Jul 2013, 21:53

Re: Re-think dead is dead

2013-07-15T21:47:17+02:00

Also, lot of upcoming features are revolving around the fact that dying is dying, like man-hunting.

And you can't seriously say that ranking up is a long term investment and that is hard to rank.

You need, currently, about 3 days to get to a level where all the upgrades are unlocked. (unless you play like a dumb and die every two games, but then you probably need to re-think how you play instead of blaming the system .

And if you are away, you are auto-recalled, so no more dying for nothing.

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 15 Jul 2013, 21:47

Re: Re-think dead is dead

2013-07-15T21:39:53+02:00

For the ... I don't count anymore : Nothing is set. I've put some numbers so I can see if things are working or not.

In the beta, it will be tweaked. By the way, it's already tweaked in the last patch : Rank 1 need just money, and then it's 10,20,30,40 .. victories, to avoid grinding ranks just by waiting for money.

If I remove the victories conditions, there is no real need to attack or defend. It's needed, unless you have a better idea (that doesn't involve redesigning the whole game, because it won't happen, too late and no time for that anymore).
.

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 15 Jul 2013, 21:39

Re: Re-think dead is dead

2013-07-15T21:17:29+02:00

Ze_PilOt wrote:
Also, your concerns are not really concerns. There is no XP to grind at all.

That REALLY is what getting victories feels like right now though...

Statistics: Posted by rkrempel — 15 Jul 2013, 21:17

Re: Re-think dead is dead

2013-07-15T21:02:06+02:00

The goal is that I want GW to play differently than FA.

By making death a real problem, you have to be more careful where to attack, what to bring with, analyze the battle, redraw when needed, and not run into the opponent base at minute 3.

If I remove that, it's just another way to launch custom game, with a reinforcement mod on top of it.

Also, your concerns are not really concerns. There is no XP to grind at all.

And stop thinking that players are dumbs and want casual games. They are playing FA to begin with.

Anyway, I won't change it, that's the core mechanic of GW, topic closed.

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 15 Jul 2013, 21:02

Re: Re-think dead is dead

2013-07-15T20:46:25+02:00

I had most of the same concerns as Sheppard has, and for mostly the same reasons, but i still voted "yes"on the poll.

Most concerns listed are not with dead=dead, but with the effects of (losing) rank. Since the rank-based abilities are not yet set, it may yet be too early to worry, annoying as it may be for the moment. To me, rank is way to much like an RPG level right now, which makes no sense to me. Is this really needed? Isn't being called General or Avatar-of-War already a reward of its own? There will be (I'm assuming) a social interaction component to GW, so the titles themselves are not meaningless (even if they are right now).

On a similar note, will rank even remain fixed on # of victories? Even if so, will these remain static limits, or could it be something more complex like "% of all victories by a faction" and/or "# victories in the last week/month"?. All those are possible solutions to get some social mobility going. Indeed, we need to prevent people from clinging to unto their seats too much, but this has nothing to do with dead=dead. If anything, death is a great promoter of social mobility (I just thought of something... an easy way to gain rank may be to tml your superior ). Ultimately, we could let characters die or retire from old age after a while, so that not taking any risks will get you only so far.

It is true that, in many other meta-games, long term motivation is important. But, is it really? I'm very happy I stopped playing the xp farming genre a long time ago. If at all possible, GW should be devoid of any such mechanics. I'm not so sure the typical RTS player is all that concerned with long term motivation.

Finally, I agree dead=dead will scare off some people, but I also think its worth to try it out to its fullest first. If it really doesn't work, then we can look into "dead=very annoying" or "dead=somewhat meaningless" options.

Statistics: Posted by rkrempel — 15 Jul 2013, 20:46

Re: Re-think dead is dead

2013-07-15T13:58:18+02:00

Death is death. It won't be changed, as it's the main mechanism around GW revolve.

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 15 Jul 2013, 13:58

Re: Re-think dead is dead

2013-07-15T12:43:43+02:00

What about loosing all progress made lets say the past 5 in game hours. The story behind could be something like this. Only memories from long-term memory can be transferred to new body. The time could differ from faction to faction.

Technically if a player dies his victories are set to 0 and the rank is set to the entry from 60m*5h before and all newer timestamps will be deleted. While the gw-client is connected and the checkbox enabled the player status/rank has to be saved once every minute on the server, where it could be stored with a timestamp.

EDIT:
Perhaps it should be better 20 hours logged in gw-network. Or taking in-battle-time in to account could be also interesting. For example 3 hours in-battle-time.

Statistics: Posted by RoLa — 15 Jul 2013, 12:43

Re: Re-think dead is dead

2013-07-11T22:17:15+02:00

how about when your character dies, he is dead for only 3 days or a week or whatever?
so you only get disabled from playing galactic war for a time.
or your character dies, and you can make a new one (up to, lets say 3 characters at the same time), and when a resurrect "skill" has recharged you can revive a dead character. The recharge time for the resurrect thing could be around a week.
possible names for that
Seraphim: Quantum Recurrence (you somehow come from the quantum world.
Aeon: the princess desire (you are revived because the princess wants you to be alive
UEF: black suitcase (You get your old rank etc. back by using... alternative but expensive techniques ;D)
Cybran: Virtual Recreation (you are reborn as some kind of AI or whatever)

Statistics: Posted by Golol — 11 Jul 2013, 22:17

Re: Re-think dead is dead

2013-07-10T21:17:34+02:00

1. Will be implemented.
2. Will be tweaked during the beta (when all the elements to judge how all must be tweaked are there).

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 10 Jul 2013, 21:17

Re: Re-think dead is dead

2013-07-10T20:55:12+02:00

Ze_PilOt wrote:
Well, the "flaw" you are pointing is what GW is about.

If I remove it, I can just call it "create custom game with fancy rotating planets".

If you are expecting GW to be played like FA, you will be disappointed.

It's not meant to be fair, it's not meant to be competitive, it's not meant to be played like FA.

And yes indeed, one of the desired goal is to get people fleeing from battle because they are no match, and higher ranked players thinking twice before attacking randomly. The other goal is also to make higher ranked players help lower ranked players, and so give them more a support role. (you will have som good players and a lot of noobs, it's not viable to think that the good players will win the game by themselves).

So yes, basically, what you think as flaw as what I want for the game.

I agree with this view, which is why "dead is dead" should stay in, but I have two caveats:
1. Auto-recall needs to be an option. We cannot have dead-is-dead for every single mistake. Everybody makes a mistake or gets tricked every now and then. There needs to be SOME leniency.
2. Rank needs to be weighed less heavily. Right now, as a rank 0, you are A) blind to who is attacking or what rank, B) unable to summon any reinforcements to help you C) earning much less money than others D) can hold way, way less money.

You should probably kill two of those by making all intel equal across all ranks and making earned income rate the same too. That will help greatly.

Statistics: Posted by FunkOff — 10 Jul 2013, 20:55

Re: Re-think dead is dead

2013-07-10T12:47:26+02:00

What could be done is a ressurection option (will have to find some lore for it, iea memory transfert for cybran, you don't actually bring back your old avatar but transfert his rank, paying for promotion for UEF, grace from the princess for aeon, some shit for sera,..) that cost a lot of money, so people in your faction will have to donate for that (of course, higher rank = more expensive). But after some days, it's lost forever.

Also, if you encounter a bug that make you lost your avatar in game while you've recalled, you have to report it.

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 10 Jul 2013, 12:47

Re: Re-think dead is dead

2013-07-10T11:59:14+02:00

Well, the "flaw" you are pointing is what GW is about.

If I remove it, I can just call it "create custom game with fancy rotating planets".

If you are expecting GW to be played like FA, you will be disappointed.

It's not meant to be fair, it's not meant to be competitive, it's not meant to be played like FA.

And yes indeed, one of the desired goal is to get people fleeing from battle because they are no match, and higher ranked players thinking twice before attacking randomly. The other goal is also to make higher ranked players help lower ranked players, and so give them more a support role. (you will have som good players and a lot of noobs, it's not viable to think that the good players will win the game by themselves).

So yes, basically, what you think as flaw as what I want for the game.

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 10 Jul 2013, 11:59

Re: Re-think dead is dead

2013-07-10T11:54:38+02:00

i dont want to critizies too much i just wanted to point out a serious flaw in your logic from what i know from other games

Statistics: Posted by ColonelSheppard — 10 Jul 2013, 11:54

Re: Re-think dead is dead

2013-07-10T11:03:20+02:00

The fact that you can't rbing avatars back is a deficit off the GW system. It needs to have that functionality. No two ways around Zep, if you need to redesign GW, then so be it.
And don't say instant recall, because, well, where the hell is it?

That's why, unlike what Sheppard seems to think, it's too soon to even start thinking about changing anything.
The next version has an away protection for exemple.

You can't see the current system is bad, because the current system is not complete yet.

Also check box agreeing to actually enter battle with your opponent would be appropriate. There's a reason why the lobby has a n 'x'.

You have one, it's the away checkbox in the GW lobby. Consider it as your ingame lobby. I won't add further confirmation, as it overly complicate how games are launched, and will end up to a lot of failures.

No two ways around Zep, if you need to redesign GW, then so be it.

I'm already way past the original budget of the game, there will be no redesign.
But I don't think it's needed. And well, there is really any choice at this point if you want GW to be finished/released.

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 10 Jul 2013, 11:03