Kosmor Forum Index
 Search Imprint      SearchSearch     Log inLog in 
 Search Legal      MemberlistMemberlist     ProfileProfile   

Ship relocation-soon to be
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Kosmor Forum Index -> Feedback / suggestions for improvement
View previous topic :: View next topic  

What do you think about the changes to ship-relocation?
Maelstroems solution should be implemented
37%
 37%  [ 9 ]
Nothing should be changed
37%
 37%  [ 9 ]
Something else (post it in this thread then)
25%
 25%  [ 6 ]
Total Votes : 24

Author Message
Cleric
Commander


Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 311
Location: Behind you

PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 13:13    Post subject: Ship relocation-soon to be Reply with quote

PLEASE USE THE POLL TO CAST YOUR VOTE. IF YOU SELECTED
"SOMETHING ELSE", POST WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE INSTEAD


Maelstroem, i don't agree with this at all.
We will loose portions or all of our fleet! What is you thinking in this? I understand that some have figured out ways to get around certain thing, but for most of us we play the game how it is intended to be played! Myself for one i have never done as you stated in your news. I am right now traveling vast distances to collect ships that i had on old sub's wp's which were transferred to my nearest planets when Apoc, integrated me a little while ago. This for me is no quick task in any way.
I don't agree with the loss of ships this way. Say for instance a wp has traveled deep into enemy space, to attack or whatever, and they themselves are attacked, ships of another house member on that wp, will be partially or completely destroyed? This game is tedious enough as it is. Once this is implemented we will all stand the chance to loose ships in another manner other that combat. Some player already stay out of any conflicts to keep from loosing any ships what so ever.
I understand you are trying to keep the legal hackers from hacking so to speak, and finding loop holes. Why don't you just take care of those on a case by case basis? We know for the most part who those players are as you do as well I'm sure. This is just my opinion though, which i guess doesn't matter much. I along with others, have grown weary of this game, and am merely waiting for Kosmor 2 to see if it will draw me back into the game..
Humble Regards
_________________
Commander Cleric in the house LINERS--007
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Nikoy
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 19:22    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am not sure that Maelstroem will see this post here, it's better to be moved to "Feedback / suggestions for improvement", isn't it?
Then probably some more people will want to say their opinion on that...
Back to top
Aurion
Member of the House


Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 591
Location: Alpha Section

PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 20:38    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nikoy wrote:
I am not sure that Maelstroem will see this post here, it's better to be moved to "Feedback / suggestions for improvement", isn't it?
Then probably some more people will want to say their opinion on that...


Done.

----

About the topic itself..well. Case by case isn't good, as Maelstroem often gets yelled at for exactly this, deciding case by case, instead of sticking with the rules. Now he takes the other way, first case by case, no introducing a general rule, and you want case by case back?

Seems like both is wrong, so let's try something new at least.

The actual effect..well, removing some of the ships, money, ressources is good. If it prevents fights as nobody wants to lose ships because of this, it's bad.

But what about conquering planets on the way, or smaller imperators? I'm not sure at the moment, but if warplanets can be a landing point for relocated ships, you could use one for catching them, trailing behind the main warplanet.

Or use several, so you won't lose everything at once. Or just don't get conquered.

Maybe it will change the way wars will be fought, but as this part doesn't work as it should, too..
_________________
Member of the House Aurion in the house Ashera
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Cleric
Commander


Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 311
Location: Behind you

PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 04:25    Post subject: Reply with quote

iuserstand everything that you said, and i also understand that anyome can & will message meali. for anything that they feel s wrong what ever that may be. Somw may travel with another wp beind them, but that will only work if you are not the house leader; if you are thr house leader, and you are either traveling peacefully, or with hostile intent, if you get attacked and defeated, you loose twice. I understsand the thinking brind this, but there has to be another way that this can be done without the inocent be hel accountable for the sly. Believe me, i hate hacks just as much as the next non-hack.
_________________
Commander Cleric in the house LINERS--007
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Maelstroem
Commander


Joined: 30 Jan 2004
Posts: 430
Location: Munich, Germany

PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 15:27    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi there,

even if it does not occur on kosmor.com, the sheer possibility of instantanous fleet travel to a very precise target is not good for the fairness and predictability of the game and can cause severe anger and frustration to affected players.

The proposed formula has been slightly altered, to make sure there is no 100% loss.

Fighting very long-distance wars is still possible, but you need to employ some more logistics (i.e. secure some friendly planets on the way).

We expect a shift away from "monster-WPs" towards smaller warplanets engaging in more local conflicts, which would be a good thing for the game itself.

Bye,
Maelstroem
_________________
Commander Maelstroem in the house Nemesis
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lady_Sjet
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 17:02    Post subject: Reply with quote

what about the possibility of a 'JumpShip', no weapons, no torps, just shields and drives, to pick up relocated ships and return them to the HP.

make it so that any relocated ships that are picked up by "JumpShips" are locked in their docking births and cannot be seperated during the travels to and from HP. jumpships would still be vunerable to attack, as they would have to recharge their jumpdrives, but being smaller in mass this would take less time.

these ships are also extremely high maintenance, as jumping 600 ly with nothing but a ship places a lot of gravitational stress from the wormholes on the hull, which is nullified by the inherent gravity of a warplanet.

this would be a good way to retrieve "lost" ships, and would also make for a statistical and tactical nightmare in enemy space, as every imperator is gunning for the JumpShip, with even the possibility of captureing it and the ships it carrying adding to the capturing players fleet size.

just a suggestion to think about.

Lady Sjet
House Ulthwe
Back to top
Gozer
Commander


Joined: 25 Oct 2007
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Thu Jul 30, 2009 22:52    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is an issue that needs to be addressed, and I prefer this solution to the current situation. Losing a fleet which becomes stranded wouldn't be good, but that's what happens in war.

An alternative, which probably isn't practical for quick implementation, would be to have the ships travel to the HP like they were a shipment of goods between planets, but slower, say 100 lyr/turn.
_________________
Commander Gozer in the house Gozerian
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nikoy
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 06:59    Post subject: Reply with quote

OK, here are my 2 cents:

1. This new implementation is some way to battle the "instant teleporting" of ships, but in my point of view is a BAD way... The side effect that I do not like is that it affects equally both sides - those who make it as an exploit and those who suffer it as a consequence of unwanted integration.
Examples:

A) Someone wants to transport his stranded ships over many LYs without using a WP (this shouldn't be possible), so he trades the planet to a subordinate and then this sub. declares independence - thus the ships are "teleported" to the nearest friendly planet. This is the exploit case. In this case I admire and like very much the new rule, which will highly discourage this practice.

B) Imagine a war between two big houses. Or just remember the Noldor_Brotherhood - Atlantis war. What happened there which concerns this case? Well - many smal WPs were sent to HP integrate the biggest subs of the enemy and to reduce their "monster" WP to a more "manageable" size. So far-so good. Everyone is doing this in a war, this is a normal practice to reduce the size of your enemy. But this is an example tor those who will suffer unfairly from the new rule. Because when they are HP integrated and the house WP is thousands of LYs away from a friendly planet they will loose 75% of their fleet practically with NO FIGHT at all! All that will be needed will be one small enemy WP with a H3 onboard - and one normal planet conquering. To avoid this probably everyone should place as big as possible fleet on his HP, showing its location to everyone and effectively "stranding" big part of his fleet on his own HP! I think this will only damage the gameplay and won't bring anything good, not to speak that losing 75% of a big fleet with no fight is not fare and not logical even. Some of the biggest personal fleets today are about 350k CP, so in such a case one can destroy close to 263K CP with only one H3!!! Is this logical?

2. It must have be a better way of combating this "instant travel" without falling into such extremes and imposing big unfairness to the people, who actually do not use it, but suffer from it! I somehow like Croaker's idea and think that we can develop it further to manage to make the difference between the "exploited" and "suffered" cases or to negate that difference and make it fair to all.

Why we don't think about alternatives of this 75% destruction?

1. Sending back the ships to the HP with the intergalactic shipment speed.
1a. Sending them as ship parts (still somehow unfair)
1b. Sending as whole ships, so one can ship them (as whole ships) from his HP to the planet he has a shipyard and "bring them back to service" without needing to assemble them anew, thus not losing the money and time needed to assemble new ship and experience of the old crew.

2. Keeping the "instant travel" mechanism , but spreading the ships at different planets - this way one have to travel a lot to collect those scattered ships. Lets say each planet can accept no more than 5 or 10K CP worth of ships.

3. Again keeping the "instant travel" mechanism , but randomizing the target planet - this time the ships don't travel to the nearest planet, but to any friendly planet, not knowing which. This will abolish the sense of the exploit.

4. ... Please put another suggestion here - there must be many more...


In conclusion I think that the new rule is UNFAIR and unwise and must not be implemented!
Let us discusss and find another, much BETTER solution to this problem!

Maelstroem, please tell your opinion on some of the above proposed alternative solutions, aren't they better?
Back to top
alphabravo
Major


Joined: 15 Feb 2004
Posts: 827
Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 12:03    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just a few observations which I thought when I read Maelstroem's post in the News section:

1.
Ships can travel up to 240 LY in a day if attacking a warplanet.

2.
Even if X% are lost, then it's often still beneficial to do so.
If I have a main fleet of 1000k, and my enemy has a fleet of 1000k, then to move 200k at a loss of 75% would still be worth it, as I would have thought that 1050k vs 1000k would have a good chance of leaving >150k alive.

3.
Would it not be better to remove the possibility of instantaneous travel at all, instead the ships will fly at certain speed towards the nearest planet, in a way where they may not attack, but may be attacked along the way.
a) One idea would be to have a set speed for ship travel,
b) Another would be to have a percentage of the regular ship range (eg h10s can move up to 60LY, h11s up to 30 etc), where a player may choose to keep his h10s and h11s together by setting the h10s to move at only 30 LY per day -- thus increasing the defensive strength of these moving ships (as the h10s/h11s will now defend as one unit).


Personally, I think that: given 2, and some other points mentioned, 3.b) would be a perfectly fair change, with some thought as to whether ships should/how they would be able to land on warplanets to take place in due course.
_________________
Major alphabravo in the house Ashera
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
Assisi
Councillor of the House


Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 314
Location: Bucuresti , Romania

PostPosted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 14:53    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am sorry that I wasn't online when this debate begun. I really can't believe that such measure can be discussed!!! This is so unfair from so many points of view and many were already wrote here.
I know that is not corect to punish so many just to be sure that you punish the bad guys. In life if you have 100 persons and you know that 99 are guilty of something and 1 is innocent but you don't know which is guilty and who's not ... you can't punish all of them cause is not moral. In legal problems is the same ...
I think we all know how hard is to build a large fleet and to make it very experienced. Would be so wrong to lose it in a blink of an eye.
If a "shift away from monster-WPs towards smaller warplanets" is expected ... then a new method of people allying with each other should be available so we can fight along each other without being in the same house.
"Engaging in more local conflicts" - think that maybe we don't want to start wars with those near us ... maybe because we had good relations until now or ... let's say that I want to conquer all the galaxy (is not my goal but let's think about it) - this can't be done only involving in local conflicts.

If such a decision is taking in this form ... I will quit Kosmor even if I like it so much and I involved myself so much and for so long.
I know that may sound like a threat (and i apologize for this) but it isn't a threat.The guys that know me ... know I tell the truth.

Let's chew this more!
_________________
Councilor of the House Assisi in the house Nemesis
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aurion
Member of the House


Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 591
Location: Alpha Section

PostPosted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 16:12    Post subject: Reply with quote

If Maelstroem has to deal with each case personally, it chews up much time, which he could invest in Kosmor 2.

Also, why don't you suggest something better then?

Another thing is, that you assume that you WILL lose your fleet. You will lose up to 75%, you may lose nothing, and you can adjust it with conquering planets nearby etc.

If Maelstroem would have had a better, easy to implement, idea, he would have done that, i guess. So, he might still do it if *you* got a better, easy to implement idea..
_________________
Member of the House Aurion in the house Ashera
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Assisi
Councillor of the House


Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 314
Location: Bucuresti , Romania

PostPosted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 16:55    Post subject: Reply with quote

From my point of view the actual variant is better... and many other ideas from above are better and more fair. Even if I don't have "something better" doesn't mean that I can't say what I think Exclamation

Regarding the percentage of the loss ... when you take a big number in consideration ... 75% is a lot. Think about a fleet of 240K ... means that you'll lose 180K. I think is a lot ... don't you ?

About the "adjusting by taking conquering planets nearby" method ... maybe I want to remain stealthy ... not to announce everybody that I am there.Also think about a big fleet composed from 5 diferent smaller fleets. All 5 guys must take a planet so their fleets to be safe ? What if you are in the space between the core and the arm of the galaxy ? What if only one guy is taking all those planets because his ships randomly takes every planet ?
Please tell me more about the "etc" ways out of this ... and maybe I will agree.

Regards
_________________
Councilor of the House Assisi in the house Nemesis
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nikoy
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 18:10    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aurion wrote:
...Also, why don't you suggest something better then?
...
If Maelstroem would have had a better, easy to implement, idea, he would have done that, i guess. So, he might still do it if *you* got a better, easy to implement idea..


Isn't it easy to implement the idea to "teleport" the ships to a random planet? If the planet is random then the exploit can't be used, can it?
Back to top
Aurion
Member of the House


Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 591
Location: Alpha Section

PostPosted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 19:58    Post subject: Reply with quote

Uh.. i had some answer here, but then it decided to display a blank (Not even with white window and border, but seemless blue background) edit window. And it's quite late/early, so this has to do:

@Assisi: What i wanted to say is, if you do not post/discuss ideas, Maelstroem has to do it. Well, he already did, and you don't like it. So, better post/discuss some ideas?

The more you discuss, the more likely is that there might be something both Maelstroem and we players like.

--

Also, i can already imagine the ensuing flame war if ships get randomly distributed etc., especially if it helps one side in a big fight, and hinders the other.
_________________
Member of the House Aurion in the house Ashera
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Assisi
Councillor of the House


Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 314
Location: Bucuresti , Romania

PostPosted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 00:09    Post subject: Reply with quote

The idea is that looking at this no matter from what direction ... there is nothing good coming from it. I am speaking about .com . I know that .de is different cause .de evolved different.
This can't be called a solution. If it is a solution means that if you put in the balance the loses and the benefits ... the benefits will be greater. Which is the benefit from this ? That people won't try ship relocation from now on ? This happened voluntarily in .com so few times. What other benefits will be for us?
From my point of view all me and my friends tryied to achieve until now will soon perish. We are heading to a somehow "free for all" game.
And why do we have to explain so more and why don't you or Maelstroem explain why do you think this is such a good implementation.
We explain ourselfs a lot. Now is your turn.

From my point of view is somehow like this : some smart guys in .de mastered a tactic which involves a lot of ship relocation; other guys in .de don't like this because they suffer from this; the situation is "solved" in .de and then also in .com without asking us.
For .com is just the way is is/will be.

regards
_________________
Councilor of the House Assisi in the house Nemesis
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Kosmor Forum Index -> Feedback / suggestions for improvement All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group