Race/Caste/Career Gameplay Balancing...

[Supreme Cmdr]

Macross makes a good point that I had not though seriously about. I've played Tribes, so I know what he's talking about.

However, those two games are designed to operate like that. BCM isn't. Sure, I can just leave it as it is (nothing to change really) and just give anyone access to their own station. But, unlike Allegiance and Tribes, there are assets available at the station. These can be misused and abused and ruin the game. I mean, a station is a self-contained unit. If nobody is in in (just like ships), its AI assumes control. So, you have a station with 5 carriers onboard, now, everyone wants to get a new carrier or keep pestering the station to send them resources (Paramedics etc). The game would be ruined, unless you have disciplined gamers on the server.

Come to think about it, this is probably the way to go. I'll probably give everyone access to their station resource (something I didn't want to do in the first place) and just let them ruin their own game. For one thing, I'm going to reduce the station resources in MP and I'm certainly disabling Fleet C&C. So, anyone want a fleet, then all players can join together and have their own fleet. Since MP supports co-op, I will have some scripts specifically designed for that, so, all players can pretty much play as one side (say Terran Military) and go take on the NPC controlled Gammulans, etc.

This is gonna be good. Lets keep brainstorming it, until it gets ridiculous and I close the thread.

Good suggestion though Macross!

[Guest]

Macross makes a good point. I always enjoy when the big honcho in command leads a group of rag-tag, undisciplined, and novice players to victory just by being a good leader and keeping an eye out.

I would love to see something like this in BC3K. Giving access to station resources to everyone is most likely to ruin the game, as any newbie or veteran that is having a bad hair day can simply waste the station's assets as well as making everyone's life miserable.

I would suggest adding a VOTE option to give command of a starbase/starstation to any player.

Another option may be to only allow players of X rank to command such assets.

"For one thing, I'm going to reduce the station resources in MP and I'm certainly disabling Fleet C&C"

Or just give Fleet C&C to those in command of the starstations! That way those players would become like the new Necromancer from Diablo II: Sending AI minions to fight for them

*shrug* Let the brainstorm continue!

[This message has been edited by Tac (edited 05-16-2000).]

[Parias]

I agree with the voting idea (infact I was going to post about it earlier today, except my "ISP went down" (actually I spent 30 minutes on tech support only to find out someone had unplugged my hub.. ugh, everyone has an idiot day) and Tac beat me to the punch ), that's definately a good thing.. especially if some loon who will drive his side into the ground (like say, me) gets put in command. Also a way for existing commanders to pass off command to another player before they leave is a good thing to implement, for obvious reasons.

------------------

Cmdr. Parias

Spectre Fleet

Chief Engineer, Starstation Destiny

ICV-Galatae

ICQ:1293359

Staff member at HardNews

"Next time you decide to drop in, keep going untill you get to a river, and THEN drop in!" -Jake Logan

[Supreme Cmdr]

quote:

---

I would suggest adding a VOTE option to give command of a starbase/starstation to any player

---

Probably a good idea. But I like the rank idea too.

I am definitely not enabling Fleet C&C in MP. Ever. That much is settled. The person in charge of a station would only have command over that station's assets. Nothing else. And besides, since all player's own assets come from their launch base, there won't be that many assets left at the station, anyway. So if a station only has 4 carriers and 4 gamers launch from there, thats it, until one of them leaves or dies, no more carriers for that station.

[Rattler]

Well, I think we just stepped over the line and ruined a good thing. If I'm the cause, I appologize right now.

Fleet C&C would have been a good thing in the hands of a competent player IMHO. Oh Well, next time I'll learn to keep my mouth shut!

------------------

Rattler, Insurgent One

Commander-In-Chief,

Insurgency

Official BC3K Tester

[email protected]

ICQ 12894104

"Arise, Old Insurgents,

Long dead but eternal in time and space.

Forgive us NOT for what we do,

We merely take your place!" - Rattler

[Guest aramike01]

In the overall span of things (public servers), I like Macross' idea the best. Just let anyone take control, although a certain rank should be required. That way, at least we know someone "good" will be in there.

My question is: will Fleet C&C be available in the Fleet Servers? I'd think that limiting that to Fleet Commanders and allowing them to hand it down as they see fit would maintain a certain element of order.

And if this could be applied to the normal servers, we would always be sure that a "regulated" game was taking place, rather than some jerk ruin the realism for everyone.

In essense, I think that if we moderate the official game the way this board is moderated with certain trusted individuals, then it'd be good to go.

There could also be "unmoderated" servers for the chaotic few, and that would leave options for those individuals. No one could complain if another option is available to them and they simply choose not to proceed along that route, right?

------------------

Cmdr. Michael Kristophers

Spectre Fleet

Commanding Officer, Spectre StarStation

ICV-Intrepid

Recruitment Officer

"You won't get the Purple Heart hiding in a foxhole!"

[This message has been edited by aramike01 (edited 05-16-2000).]

[Supreme Cmdr]

Fleet C&C, moderated or not, will ruin any MP game. Period. The potential of saturating the galaxy with NPCs, added to the players already there, and the NPCs already running around, is a clear and present game killer, regardless of what restrictions are placed.

Traditionally, Fleet C&C means that you, as the commander of some side, has access to all NPC assets that you outrank, including the commanders of stations. So, even if there were only 4 people playing from different sides and all have Fleet C&C at their disposal, the game will be ruined. The MP code in BCM is not designed to handle that sort of saturation, which is why GCO uses a completely different model entirely. I do not plan on releasing a 16 player game, with a feature that ruins it, so that I can get creamed by the same very people who clamoured for it. So, am playing it safe and will not be enabling. And since the server does client-side checks and runs its own scripts, there is zero chance of cheating because Fleet C&C is no longer rank based.

I don't think you guys, get it.

[This message has been edited by Supreme Cmdr (edited 05-16-2000).]

[Guest macross]

I'd like to cast my vote for, uh, votes. In any multiplayer game where one person can have more power than other people, there's the potential for corruption. I think that there definitely needs to be a way to oust a bad commander, so that one person can't ruin it for everyone (whether intentional or not).

On the "beating a dead horse" topic, I understand (and agree) that there's no Fleet C&C. The ability to control all of Galcom's ships is both too much power and too much responsibility.

However, I get a little fuzzy on the minutia. When you have a person in charge of a base, you say that they are in control of the base's resources. Let's say that the base has four ships, and no human players have acquired those ships. Does the base commander have C&C-like control of just those four ships?

(Throws arms up over head and waits for the "I SAID NO C&C" response...)

[Guest macross]

Hmm...on thinking about this a bit longer, I decided that even control of a few ships could ruin the game. The game would turn into "who can log on and get to the base with the most ships first" and the whole premise of the game would change. Instead of being individual commanders running around in their ships/fighters/ATVs/on foot getting personally involved in the fight, it would be people just logging into bases and sending AI-controlled ships at each other.

OK, I vote for "NO C&C" in multiplayer (until GCO!). But then, from what the SC has said it wasn't even up for vote. Maybe I'll just stop talking now...

(puts head down on desk to take a nap)

[This message has been edited by macross (edited 05-17-2000).]

[Supreme Cmdr]

quote:

---

When you have a person in charge of a base, you say that they are in control of the base's resources. Let's say that the base has four ships, and no human players have acquired those ships. Does the base commander have C&C-like control of just those four ships?

---

uhm, if I enable Fleet C&C. Yes. If I don't, no. The only thing he will have control over, assuming I allow player control of stations in BCM, is the ability to monitor the region, using Tacops, as well as control over the station's fire power via PTA and FATAL systems. He won't be allowed to launch or control any assets (ships) from that station, other than Paramedic craft, nor will the AI. The sole purpose of having a player be 'Base Commander' is so that when you guys are off in one end of the galaxy goofing off or irritating the enemy, someone is back home watching guard in case of an attack. Also, if you send a voice or chat message requesting a tow, he's the guy who sends out the Paramedics. I will also probably let him launch probes, since this is also disabled for players in MP (will activate too many regions that nobody is in).

And unlike other folks who get kicked out of the world if they die (go back to a station/base to restart), if the station/base is destroyed, he won't get kicked out, he just won't be able to do or see anything until it is repaired.

Access to a station/base is the same as picking any asset from Roster. The only difference is that there can only be one person using that asset. So, its a first come first serve issue.

quote:

---

(Throws arms up over head and waits for the "I SAID NO C&C" response...)

---

quote:

---

Hmm...on thinking about this a bit longer, I decided that even control of a few ships could ruin the game. The game would turn into "who can log on and get to the base with the most ships first" and the whole premise of the game would change. Instead of being individual commanders running around in their ships/fighters/ATVs/on foot getting personally involved in the fight, it would be people just logging into bases and sending AI-controlled ships at each other.

---

*phew* someone finally gets it...but from a different perspective entirely.

In fact, I am tempted to even classify all the assets into race/caste sections, in much the same way I have the Stormcarrier accessible to Gammulan Military only. The problem is that we have so many races/castes, and believe it or not, not that many ships to go around. For eg, if I make only the Battlecruiser class accessible to Terrans, Empirians and Vesperons, and Aestroms to, say, the Zelons, it could get diverse very quickly but most will be pissed. Imagine wanting for fly a Firestorm, but as a Terran Military Commander, you don't have access to it.

I've been thinking about that a lot. So, should I do it or leave it as is?

[Rattler]

At the risk of raising the hackles of the SC, Rattler would fly a Stormcarrier if it were available. Why? I just like it! Insurgents are supposed to be resourceful, so why wouldn't we have assets from more than one caste/race? If we can steal it, buy it, or borrow it, we'd want it! Of course, there would be Galcommies that would want to fly it as well instead of the standard Galcom Issue, thus I see the problem here. Just my slight input. As always, Yours is the final word SC!

On further review, Hell I'd fly a '57 Chevy if it would get us into the game faster. Phish, get to work rigging those engines and hyper drives on that Nomad! The Red one in the rear of the lot! Don't forget to put that .50 cal in the grill while you are at it!

------------------

Rattler, Insurgent One

Commander-In-Chief,

Insurgency

Official BC3K Tester

[email protected]

ICQ 12894104

"Arise, Old Insurgents,

Long dead but eternal in time and space.

Forgive us NOT for what we do,

We merely take your place!" - Rattler

[This message has been edited by Rattler (edited 05-17-2000).]

[Eclipse]

I have a quick question regarding the station commanders, will he be displaced if the staion is captured or will he just transfer to the victors?

------------------

Cmdr. Antilles

Spectre Fleet

Spectre Starstation

ICV- Eclipse

Chief Security Officer

Learning is not compulsory... Neither is survival.

[EricR]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr:

*phew* someone finally gets it...but from a different perspective entirely.

In fact, I am tempted to even classify all the assets into race/caste sections, in much the same way I have the Stormcarrier accessible to Gammulan Military only. The problem is that we have so many races/castes, and believe it or not, not that many ships to go around. For eg, if I make only the Battlecruiser class accessible to Terrans, Empirians and Vesperons, and Aestroms to, say, the Zelons, it could get diverse very quickly but most will be pissed. Imagine wanting for fly a Firestorm, but as a Terran Military Commander, you don't have access to it.

I've been thinking about that a lot. So, should I do it or leave it as is?

---

My vote is for race/caste specific assets with overlap (e.g. insurgents, mercs, assassins, etc.). Do you still have that MS Word proposed asset distribution I sent you a while back? If not, I can re-send it

Eric

[Guest Ron Wallin]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr:

*phew* someone finally gets it...but from a different perspective entirely.

...if I make only the Battlecruiser class accessible to Terrans, Empirians and Vesperons, and Aestroms to, say, the Zelons, it could get diverse very quickly but most will be pissed. Imagine wanting for fly a Firestorm, but as a Terran Military Commander, you don't have access to it.

I've been thinking about that a lot. So, should I do it or leave it as is?

---

Big question. Here's more of my musings:

1. Leave things the way they are and people will b@tch about not getting a Stormcarrier.

2. Make assets realistic based one race/caste/employer and people will b@tch about someone having some sort of advantage.

3. Open it up and everyone will be playing with Stormcariers. (Yes, I know that that's not the current plan).

Either way someone will cry foul. Instead let's look at the overall game. Although it's MP, would it be likely that a GALCOM Cmdr. would control anything but Galactan/Constellation class BC? (not to mention the forgotten 3rd type as yet to be mentioned this year!)

True, certain groups (like the Insurgents) would have access to a broader selection of craft than a GALCOM Cmdr., but that's the game. Isn't it?

Perhaps it should be a server option: Realistic assets/free for all assets/Everyone get's a certain type(Stormcarier).

Personally, I'd play Realistic and you'll most likely find me plowing into your 6 at the helm of a fast Warmonger!

[Whisper]

Perhaps the best way to solve this tricky little dilemma is such:

Choose a set of ships that everyone has accses to, and then have one or two ships that unique to each class. For instance, a Terran/Commander could have a LRT-10, but only a trader or commercial class would have accses to the MRT-15 (drool ). And, as in the case that so often comes up, a gammulan/commander would be the only one to have a Stormcarrier available. But any millitary class would be able to snatch up a lesser ship, such as a garid or questar.

That way, every caste would have an advantage over another caste (ship only they have), but no disadvantage (everyone gets same choices to "basic" ships. With the exception of the cargo haulers, of course.

Anyhoo, that's my two cents. I'm sure Almighty SC will find a solution that'll leave everyone happy.

------------------

Commander David "Whisper" Liev

*Wraith Fleet Fighter Command

"We Will Be There"

=Wraith Fleet=

[Chris Blair]

Has anyone seen the movie U-571? A group of americans had to steal plans from an enemey ship but right when they were getting ready to go back to there ship than "BOOM"! There goes there ride home. Woops, never mind what are they on now??? OOOOO, another submarine. But the only problem is it's all in "GERMEN". But they figure it out and they DO get back home safeley.

What I am trying to get at is the same event can happen in BC:M. You can recreate that event but only a little different. Your most likely going to be on an alien starship so there you go. Hope I didn't take anyone off track here.

See ya...

------------------

Cmdr. Chris Alan Blair

Spectre Fleet

Spectre Starstation

ICV-Ticonderoga

[Supreme Cmdr]

quote:

---

I have a quick question regarding the station commanders, will he be displaced if the staion is captured or will he just transfer to the victors?

---

I hadn't thought about it because I wasn't planning on enabling station capture in MP. But, if I do enable it (oh boy, who wants to go try and capture New America!) which I suspect I will, I will just auto-launch the station commander in his shuttle if the station is captured, just like any NPC ship.

I've also decided to kill him if the station is destroyed, then that way, he is just like any other player in an asset that gets destroyed. He can then restart from another base, if there are any left.

quote:

---

Do you still have that MS Word proposed asset distribution I sent you a while back? If not, I can re-send it

---

I think I deleted it Eric. Besides, I think its outdated. For one thing, I don't think it contained the MK3 Battlecruiser. If you have a new one, send it to me. I'm not saying am gonna do it, but I'm going to start thinking about doing it.

quote:

---

Perhaps it should be a server option: Realistic assets/free for all assets/Everyone get's a certain type

---

Ron makes all good points, and the quote above may be the way to go if I do decide to do this classification.

Anyway, regardless, I know for a fact that there aren't enough assets to go around, in order to justify the effort involved in doing a race/caste distribution if most servers won't use the realistic classification. Thats why I have not even considered Eric's proposal for the past 18 months or so. I'm still not convinced that it is worth the effort because even if I do it, I doubt that many servers would play realistic. And then, even if I enable the Stormcarrier for any race/caste other than Gammulan/Military (something I have no intentions of doing), most everyone will be playing with it and that'll be the end of that.

At any rate, I will give it some thought. I plan on doing about 25 more new ships for GCO, so, if I don't do this classification in BCM, I will most definitely do it in GCO as I had already planned.

[CorpseGravy]

Just a thought....

If asset switching if possible, players who opt to sign on as station commanders could also have a ship to command as well. That way they can still get into the thick of things and still be able to keep an eye on the station and to dispense the paramedics.

It kinda seems to me that station commanding by itself would be lame. The stations can't manuever and asside from yelling for help and launching an occasional missle, what else would he be able to do.

Wait a minute...I guess he could still run around the station in first person!

Hmmm....

------------------

Cmdr. CorpseGravy

UCV Serenity Seven

[Guest]

"In fact, I am tempted to even classify all the assets into race/caste sections, in much the same way I have the Stormcarrier accessible to Gammulan Military only. The problem is that we have so many races/castes, and believe it or not, not that many ships to go around. For eg, if I make only the Battlecruiser class accessible to Terrans, Empirians and Vesperons, and Aestroms to, say, the Zelons, it could get diverse very quickly but most will be pissed. Imagine wanting for fly a Firestorm, but as a Terran Military Commander, you don't have access to it.

I've been thinking about that a lot. So, should I do it or leave it as is?"

Well.. I like the restriction of ships to race/caste. All I say is that if you want a WARMONGER or any other ship that gets your adrenalin up... go CAPTURE ONE!

(Here's where I start throwing in things I shouldnt..but what the heck! BANSAI!! )

If you bring a captured WARMONGER to a station, why not have it become an asset of that station? Would be a great thing to have, encourages the capture of ships and may keep the balance of power... imagine a server where the players have killed all the ships in a certain sector.. what would they do then? Get jetpacks and gung-ho to the other station? (Man I just pictured a team of marines piggy-back riding a transport.. just like the Fremen in Dune! LOL!! )

Anyway, throwing more wood into my funeral pyre...

[This message has been edited by Tac (edited 05-18-2000).]

[Rattler]

Not in this upcoming release he won't! At least I don't think he will! BCTE isn't coming in BCM I don't believe, and before you get in too far over your head, word of caution. Don't even ask!

------------------

Rattler, Insurgent One

Commander-In-Chief,

Insurgency

Official BC3K Tester

[email protected]

ICQ 12894104

"Arise, Old Insurgents,

Long dead but eternal in time and space.

Forgive us NOT for what we do,

We merely take your place!" - Rattler

[Guest]

Thought I'd throw my vote in with the "Realistic assets" mode of play. Would really make people think about what race/caste they would like to play. Plus a person wouldn't log in to find everyone else commanding the best ship in the game (no diversity).

quote:

---

Imagine wanting for fly a Firestorm, but as a Terran Military Commander, you don't have access to it.

---

IMO to solve that situation, make it so that when a commander defeats a particular ship in combat and it isn't destroy, he can tow it to a station and have the option of taking command of that ship. (spoils of war)

If a Terran Commander has the fortitude to defeat a Stormcarrier and lucky enough to be able to tow it back to HQ (in one piece) then he/she deserves to take command of it.

quote:

---

The problem is that we have so many races/castes, and believe it or not, not that many ships to go around.

---

IMO make certain ships available to certain race/caste only.(only the major super powers get this privilege) These racescastes would still have the option of picking ships from the common pool of ships but other race/caste wouldn't have access to theirs.

Other race/castes(not technologically advanced or just poor) would be restricted to using only ships from the common pool of ships.

Every race/caste or just race doesn't necessarily have to have a specific ship for it, for now it can use ships from the common pool.

1. This would encourage diversity.

2. If a player is unhappy with their ship he can try to capture a better one.

3. Everyone walks away happy.

[Joseph Bosch]

Well sounds good and all i hope to op for station command as i love the idea of controling a station along with takeing care of keeping people supplyed for our wars + i think it will be fun if i'm able to jump or fly to newly taken over stations to control out on the rim

------------------

COMMANDER BOSCH

ORION FLEET

TSUNAMI BATTLE GROUP

GCV - OBENBONE

ICQ:24625094

"For Orion Home and Soul we guard you"

[Guest]

My vote is for realistic assets. IMHO It seems to add to the concept of alien races within the game if they are not all flying around in the same type of crafts. As there are not enough ships to go around some overlap is required but it would seem correct that certain races have access to technology which presumably they have developed. This would encourage people to develop strategies for ship types which would not have been their first choice. I appreciate this may result in a less than perfectly level playing field - but thats life.

[Chris Blair]

Brandon, I agree with the realisum in the game. No matter what any race has there own prefferences and there own way of thanking. Like the design of ships. After all there are alians in the game! As I said earler, in the movie U-571 they got ahold of a Germen ship. Now to us at this time in human we consider anyone who does not have the same skin color an alian beacuse they are "DIFFERENT" than us. And some different color races have different ways of thanking. But we are ALL HUMAN.

Rattler, (correct me if I am rong SC) But I do rember in a few recent posts that the SC is making the "TE PACK" another product from BC3000ad Inc. You can play it without any of hte pcomming BC games but it will only be like a pratice part if you don't have BC:M or any of the other games that support it. BC3020ad will have the "SCEAMLESS TECH" to where we won't have to switch between game engens. And he said that it would be releaced arround the same time as BC:M. He didn't deside if he would have it in a PACK with BC:M in the future.

See ya...

------------------

Cmdr. Chris Alan Blair

Spectre Fleet

Spectre Starstation

ICV-Ticonderoga

[Supreme Cmdr]

CorpseGravy:

quote:

---

If asset switching if possible..

---

Its not. Please stay on topic. BCM and BCTE are two different products, so, you can't run around a station. Have you not being paying attention? OK, who last had the airlock key? Hey you! c'mere!!!

Tac:

quote:

---

All I say is that if you want a WARMONGER or any other ship that gets your adrenalin up... go CAPTURE ONE!

---

I'm not allowing ship capture in BCM, only in GCO. And at this point, I haven't decided to allow station capture either.

quote:

---

Anyway, throwing more wood into my funeral pyre...

---

ROTFL!!!

Karl:

quote:

---

IMO to solve that situation, make it so that when a commander defeats a particular ship in combat and it isn't destroy, he can tow it to a station and have the option of taking command of that ship. (spoils of war)

---

hmmmm, let me think about that for a sec... No.

Joseph:

quote:

---

Well sounds good and all i hope to op for station command as i love the idea of controling a station along with takeing care of keeping people supplyed for our wars + i think it will be fun if i'm able to jump or fly to newly taken over stations to control out on the rim

---

Yep. It'll be fun. In fact, in BCM, you don't launch from Frontend anymore and the game doesn't stop when u dock. When you leave Roster and Log Off, control returns to the base you selected. You are then in the station (as if it were a ship) and have access to its views (as if it were a ship), TACOPS etc. You can just sit there and observe the region until you are ready to launch. You then press the LAUNCH button from TACOPS and you are moved from the station to your ship (which you selected in Roster) and then you get the ship launch transition.

When you dock with a station, the same thing happens. Instead of being greeted with the FE menu (line BC3K v2.0x), you are back at this 'station view' and can go about your business, when you are ready, by executing FE as normal. The world is still going on and your ship is in the station. You can actually look outside and see the world. So, if you are at the station carrying out repairs and you happen to leave Tradcom and look out view the station views or TACOPS, you'd probably see the station under attack. You can then opt to launch or stay there. If you stay there and it is destroyed, you are ejected, in a shuttle (which you have control of), just like it does for NPCs. And you can just fly to another station and requisition another craft.

Same thing happens in both single or multiplayer. So, thats why I thought that making at least one person take command of a station isn't such a big deal to do. The only difference is that a Station Commander has access to the stations assets (fighters, shuttles, ships, weapons etc) and he controls it (no flight controls) just as if it were a carrier. And someone who is just a guest at the station, can only use the views, access FE, as well as launch from TACOPS. They won't have any system control of the station.

However, if Fleet C&C is disabled, the Station Commander can only control the assets of that station. In MP, I'm just going to make sure that you can only have that many ships on your side. So, even if the station has 5 carriers, you can't launch any of them, they are there as replacements in case one of your players die. Because when they do, they are warped back to the station (if it is in working condition) and can't launch without chosing an asset. So, if you have a MK3 and you screw up and lose it, you probably won't get one for awhile, and you may just have to got out in whatever the station has. And if you think you're going to sit at the station until it replaces your original MK3, thats your choice, depending on the server config -which may have a timeout which determines if you can sit there indefinitely or be kicked out into the darkness of space in a shuttle.

Also, the station can host as many players as possible, so, it is possible that all bad players could possibly be in a station, chatting, while waiting for their ships to be replaced/repaired if they don't want to launch with another type....at least until the enemy shows up, figures out that you ladies are all there, and blows up the station! muwahahahahaha

Chris:

We got the point about U-571 the first time, thanks. Repeat it again and you'll get to see the wet side of this Trout.