![]() |
|
There are 85 POBs on the server. - Printable Version +- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums) +-- Forum: Discovery General (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3) +--- Forum: Discovery RP 24/7 General Discussions (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=23) +--- Thread: There are 85 POBs on the server. (/showthread.php?tid=110488) |
RE: There are 84 POBs on the server. - ... kur nubÄ—go? - 01-19-2014 Not complainting, do whatever you want. Just took as an example how POB's causes problems and -force- other people to play how you want them to play, which is powergaming. Trusting people not to powertrip is silly, if it can be abused - it will be abused, and only persons to blame is those who created such system to begin with. Failing to recognize how features they implement will be damaging to everyone. This is not how roleplay should be done. Or any person who's aware of the game environment, not just his own should behave. And, Jack, I'm fully aware that you didn't build that base to screw pirates over intentionally. But you see, even with good intentions, when system is flawed, problems arises. One cannot expect other to always think of others. RE: There are 84 POBs on the server. - Birdtalon - 01-19-2014 Create a Battleship weapon which fires base killing torpedoes, uses entire powercore and has a few minutes cooldown and costs into the hundred millions for the ammo. Make it super strong so it can kill bases quickly but the BS has to be protected because it's powercore is getting barbecued by using it and it won't be able to defend itself. Look how quickly the nomads destroyed a base in Vanilla RE: There are 84 POBs on the server. - Mephistoles - 01-19-2014 Hi. Haven't read thread. Question. Why aren't player bases restricted to factions? RE: There are 84 POBs on the server. - Croft - 01-19-2014 I like the idea of PoBs being requested rather than simply being built where ever. It struck me as odd that even EVE limited their bases to moons yet Disco allowed folks carte blanche with their own. If you'll indulge me, I'd like to propose a reworking of the POB system.
A bit of a rundown of my reasoning for those still with me: An SRP style request for bases means that a base must serve a purpose within the RP world and adds accountablity. Stupid things like blocking wormholes, securing mining fields and shooting people who try to dock on a planet wouldn't happen. Removing the grind. No more tunnel visioned suppliers. Less dull resupply work. The 1 month max run time? That's serves two purposes, less grind being the first, the second is an inbuilt expiration date. If a group stops playing, or a faction dies off the base automatically removes itself. Making bases invulnerable and removing their guns. Why? Because shooting a base for hours isn't fun and the firepower required lags or crashes the server. Not to mention all the hell it causes. Coupled with the difficulty in actually getting a base means that hard work won't disappear to a few clowns in battleships. Removing the jumpdrives and giving cloaks out to the various factions? Just seems like a good idea. It puts more people on the lanes, gives hard pressed factions a new toy and a new lease of life. Plus it cuts down the supply grind which is nice. Finally giving bases an actual role and the looks to go with it. I'll be honest, bases look like boring chunks of metal with crap taped on. No offense to the modders and texture artists who made them but they do. Right now you can't tell a warehouse from a pirate den. If we want bases to become part of the server and not an addon they need to look the part and more importantly, to serve a purpose. Here's my ideas on a few kinds of bases. Smelter: Lots of smoke stacks, dirty and grimy. It buys ore and sells metal, Buy prices must be low so that miners must decide to take the quick cash or the big money. The sell price of metal must equal to the ratio of ore converted into metal, such as taking two ore to make 1 metal would mean the metal would be twice the price of ore. Warehouse: Large containers, bare bones and lots of mooring points. Does nothing but store items. Cannot be built within a mining system or near a jump gate/hole. Black Market: Medium sized, rusty and with a few small docking bays. A wretched hive of scum and villiany, you must be cautious. Acts as a halfway point for smugglers not wanting to do endure another half an hour of cruising while alt tabbed. Prices must be set slightly lower than half that of the highest sell point. Again must make people choose the quick money or the big score. Cannot be placed within four jumps of a high sell point. I can't think of any more at this point but I'm sure someone can think of a few. (Edit: Updated the smelter's pricing demands.) RE: There are 84 POBs on the server. - Haste - 01-19-2014 As I've said on Skype, base survivability should go down the more weapon platforms it has. Increase the hitpoints platforms have, maybe rebalance some to be more useful against specific ships (think: mortars on anti-cap platforms). Increase their respawn time (significantly). Make them sap base repair materials when they're shot down. This way, sieging a base with 6 platforms would be all about shooting down the platforms as they respawn to drain its resources, while hitting the base itself to also keep it busy while you wait for the platforms to re-appear. Bases without platforms or with only one or two aren't nearly as big an "annoyance" regardless of their location as a base with half a dozen (angry) platforms and can be more resistant against sieges. RE: There are 84 POBs on the server. - Spud - 01-19-2014 First question: Do you know with 100% certainey that the PoBs are causing it? Someone already blamed the shipnerf and it turned out the lag was just as bad without it. Second question: Do you know what part of the plugin is causing it, and which part causes the largest load? Is it the "collisions quesions" of guns inpacting it, is it the weapons platforms, is it wear and tear/repair, is it the commodity trader? When you know what part of it is, specifically try to optimize that, if that doesnt work simplify some features, maybe remove them. Restricting them to people who go on the forum could be a solution. Someone must ask for it on the forum, and the admins will give the person one sort of commodity that is only sold on admin bases, instead of all that stuff gatheres all over the place. For deciding when a base gets approved: Should be a 100% objective mechanism. If its not we will see favoritism and jealousy. Possible criteria for approval: -Is at least one of the people involved able to communicate in good english -Is at least one person involved able to make a simple RP post about the base. It will not be decided if the RP is good or bad, only if the post is IRP or not. -Base location and reputation will be specified. There could be a rule that says: Base may not shoot any faction which is friendly to a station, planet, gate, or tradelane within weapons platforms range. Must be out of weapons platfomrs range from a gate or jumphole. That rule will allow the base to protect locations from players, but not mess up traveling. With that, the bases could also receive a little more love from the admins. For example, make sure the orientation and angles look good and adjsut if necessary. Shut off the "collision questions" of guns on the base, if that causes lag. Or maybe only turn it on once forum RP for its destruction has been made. Also unlock the base Levels above 4. The Level 10 base Looks really good why is it locked? RE: There are 84 POBs on the server. - chase.way - 01-19-2014 Make them much harder to get. Don't allow repairing once shield is up. RE: There are 84 POBs on the server. - Johnnie-Lapierre - 01-19-2014 @Chase.way no way since a fighter can keep your shield up and your base goes boom... RE: There are 84 POBs on the server. - SeaFalcon - 01-19-2014 Let someone who can actually decently code, code stuff, instead of people that toss stuff together, just because it looks cool. RE: There are 84 POBs on the server. - Tachyon - 01-19-2014 (01-19-2014, 02:49 PM)SeaFalcon Wrote: Let someone who can actually decently code, code stuff, instead of people that toss stuff together, just because it looks cool. You mean like competent devs for their respective tasks DDDDDDDD ?Sorry Kaz
|