Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

We're offering banner ads on our site from just $5!

1. Details HERE. 2. GDNet+ Subscriptions HERE. 3. Ad upload HERE.


#ActualSinisterPride

Posted 20 January 2013 - 06:20 PM

 Hello again StarBaseCitadel smile.png

 

I have read everything offered and have a decent grasp of what your attempting to creat within SBT. The only point I'm not clear on (and I have a feeling I know why) is how the team aspect goes into play.

 

From what I understand there will be open uncontrolled territory which can be claimed and colonized in a sense. Understandable within itself but where the confusion strikes is in how the team mechanic comes into play. I'm assuming each server, for instance, would be considered a galaxy of sorts (possibly multiple but for arguments sake I'll keep it at that). This in turn means the galaxy is a constant, always active/online. Things such as resources which are being mined or accrued through planet ownership/control are building even when you are not actively playing. This also means your colonized planets have their defenses (orbiting ships possibly armadas/satelite weaponry later) on guard at all times. The only difference would be more strategic attack patterns, decisions and reactions when you are actually online/in control/actively playing.

 

If all my assumptions thus far have been close or accurate here is where my confusion lies:

 

Do teams equate alliances such as clans?

 

If so, are they restricted to only allying with other colonies (players) of their own race?

 

This model seemed unlikely given what I know so far but it was withing my range of thoughts.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

If I was wrong with my first assumption (which I'm almost certain I was) and the servers are not a constant (dedicated servers are expensive as far as I understand it) then the alternate proposal is instance based gameplay. This line of thought was more conducive to what I understand of SBC thus far.

 

With instance based gaming being the model proposed the match set ups would go something along the lines of this. Teams are matched up at the start of a match, a random galaxy is generated (with neutral camps as you said) and you say "have at it".  I had considered this in my thoughts originally when I posed the two questions. For other reasons the second of the two questions still applies.

 

Another part of my "I think I know why comment" is that, if I'm not mistaken, victory conditions haven't been implemented into the equation. I can see why, there are tons of rammifications for each proposed Victory condition. Each victory condition I considered had implications which could cause desired as well as undesired effects (turtling/stalemates as you mentioned). All planets in the sector/galaxy being controlled by your team was one. Another was all offensive units and means of creating said units destroyed on opposing teams. The third wasn't as conventional but had some quirks to it. Reaching a set goal (for each team to try and reach together within their allied collective) of production/prosperity grants an automatic victory to which ever team/allies. This last one could lead to a interesting gameplay pattern in which people who dont wish to be violent and prefer to play defensive (like they would rather focus on resource/economic aspect) have their method of winning with their strengths. My general suggestion is that you implement something along the lines of all three at once. This way everyone can have their cake and eat it too laugh.png

 

So, there you go. You essentially asked which features you should focus on. I'm not sure if I answered or helped with what you asked now that I think about it lol.. I reached for all the points I saw as possible loose ends while mainly trying to absorb/grasp what your concept is.

 

At the very least, you can be happy knowing that your thoughts are well iterated and coherent enough for someone to grasp them to the extent I'd like to believe I have.

 

I hope it proves atleast somewhat useful,

Sin ←§•ɸ◦§→


#2SinisterPride

Posted 20 January 2013 - 06:18 PM

 Hello again StarBaseCitadel smile.png

 

I have read everything offered and have a decent grasp of what your attempting to creat within SBT. The only point I'm not clear on (and I have a feeling I know why) is how the team aspect goes into play.

 

From what I understand there will be open uncontrolled territory which can be claimed and colonized in a sense. Understandable within itself but where the confusion strikes is in how the team mechanic comes into play. I'm assuming each server, for instance, would be considered a galaxy of sorts (possibly multiple but for arguments sake I'll keep it at that). This in turn means the galaxy is a constant, always active/online. Things such as resources which are being mined or accrued through planet ownership/control are building even when you are not actively playing. This also means your colonized planets have their defenses (orbiting ships possibly armadas/satelite weaponry later) on guard at all times. The only difference would be more strategic attack patterns, decisions and reactions when you are actually online/in control/actively playing.

 

If all my assumptions thus far have been close or accurate here is where my confusion lies:

 

Do teams equate alliances such as clans?

 

If so, are they restricted to only allying with other colonies (players) of their own race?

 

This model seemed unlikely given what I know so far but it was withing my range of thoughts.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

If I was wrong with my first assumption (which I'm almost certain I was) and the servers are not a constant (dedicated servers are expensive as far as I understand it) then the alternate proposal is instance based gameplay. This line of thought was more conducive to what I understand of SBC thus far.

 

With instance based gaming being the model proposed the match set ups would go something along the lines of this. Teams are matched up at the start of a match, a random galaxy is generated (with neutral camps as you said) and you say "have at it".  I had considered this in my thoughts originally the second of the two questions still applies.

 

Another part of my "I think I know why comment" is that, if I'm not mistaken, victory conditions haven't been implemented into the equation. I can see why, there are tons of rammifications for each proposed Victory condition. Each victory condition I considered had implications which could cause desired as well as undesired effects (turtling/stalemates as you mentioned). All planets in the sector/galaxy being controlled by your team was one. Another was all offensive units and means of creating said units destroyed on opposing teams. The third wasn't as conventional but had some quirks to it. Reaching a set goal (for each team to try and reach together within their allied collective) of production/prosperity grants an automatic victory to which ever team/allies. This last one could lead to a interesting gameplay pattern in which people who dont wish to be violent and prefer to play defensive (like they would rather focus on resource/economic aspect) have their method of winning with their strengths. My general suggestion is that you implement something along the lines of all three at once. This way everyone can have their cake and eat it too laugh.png

 

So, there you go. You essentially asked which features you should focus on. I'm not sure if I answered or helped with what you asked now that I think about it lol.. I reached for all the points I saw as possible loose ends while mainly trying to absorb/grasp what your concept is.

 

At the very least, you can be happy knowing that your thoughts are well iterated and coherent enough for someone to grasp them to the extent I'd like to believe I have.

 

I hope it proves atleast somewhat useful,

Sin ←§•ɸ◦§→


#1SinisterPride

Posted 20 January 2013 - 06:16 PM

 Hello again StarBaseCitadel smile.png

 

I have read everything offered and have a decent grasp of what your attempting to creat within SBT. The only point I'm not clear on (and I have a feeling I know why) is how the team aspect goes into play.

 

From what I understand there will be open uncontrolled territory which can be claimed and colonized in a sense. Understandable within itself but where the confusion strikes is in how the team mechanic comes into play. I'm assuming each server, for instance, would be considered a galaxy of sorts (possibly multiple but for arguments sake I'll keep it at that). This in turn means the galaxy is a constant, always active/online. Things such as resources which are being mined or accrued through planet ownership/control are building even when you are not actively playing. This also means your colonized planets have their defenses (orbiting ships possibly armadas/satelite weaponry later) are on guard at all times. The only difference would be more strategic attack patterns, decisions and reactions when you are actually online/in control/actively playing.

 

If all my assumptions thus far have been close or accurate here is where my confusion lies:

 

Do teams equate alliances such as clans?

 

If so, are they restricted to only allying with other colonies (players) of their own race?

 

This model seemed unlikely given what I know so far but it was withing my range of thoughts.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

If I was wrong with my first assumption (which I'm almost certain I was) and the servers are not a constant (dedicated servers are expensive as far as I understand it) then the alternate proposal is instance based gameplay. This line of thought was more conducive to what I understand of SBC thus far.

 

With instance based gaming being the model proposed the match set ups would go something along the lines of this. Teams are matched up at the start of a match, a random galaxy is generated (with neutral camps as you said) and you say "have at it".  I had considered this in my thoughts originally the second of the two questions still applies.

 

Another part of my "I think I know why comment" is that, if I'm not mistaken, victory conditions haven't been implemented into the equation. I can see why, there are tons of rammifications for each proposed Victory condition. Each victory condition I considered had implications which could cause desired as well as undesired effects (turtling/stalemates as you mentioned). All planets in the sector/galaxy being controlled by your team was one. Another was all offensive units and means of creating said units destroyed on opposing teams. The third wasn't as conventional but had some quirks to it. Reaching a set goal (for each team to try and reach together within their allied collective) of production/prosperity grants an automatic victory to which ever team/allies. This last one could lead to a interesting gameplay pattern in which people who dont wish to be violent and prefer to play defensive (like they would rather focus on resource/economic aspect) have their method of winning with their strengths. My general suggestion is that you implement something along the lines of all three at once. This way everyone can have their cake and eat it too laugh.png

 

So, there you go. You essentially asked which features you should focus on. I'm not sure if I answered or helped with what you asked now that I think about it lol.. I reached for all the points I saw as possible loose ends while mainly trying to absorb/grasp what your concept is.

 

At the very least, you can be happy knowing that your thoughts are well iterated and coherent enough for someone to grasp them to the extent I'd like to believe I have.

 

I hope it proves atleast somewhat useful,

Sin ←§•ɸ◦§→


PARTNERS