multiplayer concerns

A forum for online playing, administration, bugs and feature requests

multiplayer concerns

Postby Wireless Caller » Sun Nov 16, 2003 12:02 am

ok, lets see.. i had a few concerns about multiplayer.

i hate to bring up this silly subject over and over again but,

1. destructable stations.. lets this isn't second life of course or trying to make things 100% realistic. but if someone logs off for the night and logs in the morning to see his station not exist anymore. The ex-owner asks other players what happend to his station.. Other players answers that his station has been destroyed 15 minutes after he logged off because players live in a different timezone where its day time over there.. fusterating isn't it.. especially when you can't stay up late at night trying to defend it. also, a player having their owned station is a cool idea. this feature should be toggable either enabled or disabled.

2. wingman. ok I know that wingmans actually add depths to the game but unfortunitly some players would like to fly alone when going into PvP combat and explore the universe or go on a player killing spree. besides, if this is a multiplayer mode in in TCP/IP, it shouldn't be treated like a single player game. unlike the pk hunter has like 20+ ships for his wingman, and tells his npc to kill this bad guy. and now this player killer has 20+ ships after him.. who wins this fight? the person with npc wingmans of course. and now players are forced to get npc wingman in order to keep up with others. this feature should be toggable either enabled or disabled. If the AI is fairly dumb, they it shouldent be an issue because the user could go after the player first.

3. star ships.. i'm not too sure about this feature but as long as players don't get their hands on big giant combat ships such as capital ships/battle ships/destroyers, i've played e&b, and eve-online and played with battleships but there is no skill in pvp what so ever. just point and click. i know it also adds depth to the game but some players would rather fly star fighters for some skill person vs. person. flying freighters, cargo ships are kind of ok. turrets should be used to defend themselves from attacks. gunboats, not too sure. i'm sure this subject has been talked about in different threads so I dunno.

4. NPC bots.. if they want to really be completely removed from the multiplayer mode, then I think that would save a lot of bandwidth too. but then again if a player wants combat, then he would have to take it out on another player. but then again, if NPC bots are enabled in multiplayer mode, could be only encounterd when mission is accepted and coming there at the right spot. the NPC bots have to be client side only. they could be toggable for expermenting only.

5. Peer to Peer.. now this is kind of a rare issue where if you jump to another system which is required to connect to another server, than it would do so. however, it would be very hard because it would require for a server to stay up 24/7. Like an IRC network, how much bandwidth would it take for at least 4 servers to connect to an entire network?? from different locations? where 4 servers are connected to eachother in an entire IRC like network, instead of all the players connecting to just one server?

you see, fights wouldent be balanced/fun with one player just flying a starfighter alone, another player flying a giant battle ship, and another player with a fleet of npc wingmans on his side. single player is ok for those features. multiplayer version would be a hell of a lot funner with just players flying otherships besides, the carrier, battleships, destroyers. interaction with other players is the final key. but people could always try if they wanted to and see how it turns out. when realeased, it should be tested out first.
Wireless Caller
Merchant
Merchant
 
Posts: 43
Topics: 10
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 12:31 pm

Share On:

Share on Facebook Facebook Share on Twitter Twitter Share on Digg Digg

Postby DirtyMagic » Mon Nov 17, 2003 12:49 pm

Some good points. Can't resist throwing in my own 2 cents :)

Yup, player owned stations would be really cool and it would definitely be a kick in the bag to have one blown up while you're sleeping. There could maybe be some nasty automated defences/fighter squads onboard that would make it a major task to destroy? Maybe make them undestroyable? The player could get a percentage commision on any trades within his station to help offset the cost of the station.

I've mentioned before that I like the idea of things like cap ships and wingmen, though it needs to be carefully balanced. There's always that natural balance in games where the more you play the more powerful you become and the more cool opportunities open up to you. You also tend to end up with piles of money that you need to spend on more powerful toys. Cap ships and hired help like wingmen or trader pilots give people that have playing for months something to buy. There need to be some serious consequences for picking on "smaller kids", though, and some incentive for those people that just want to fly smaller ships. It could even come down to smaller ships getting more "story driven" missions and larger ships just running cargo around. Certainly cap ships sound unbeatable but that's why the torpedo was invented :)

NPC bots would probably be necessary for a big supply of ships to shoot and loot, protect, escort. Not every wants to go online and make enemies. Maybe some sort of duel mode or voluntary PK system where people only have to take on other players if they want? Or give big faction hits to people that PK "peaceful traders".

Maybe there could be player generated missions? Pontiac could arrange a duel with HellcatV for Friday the 9th, then post on the mission computer looking for wingmen. Everyone shows up on the right day/time and big trouble ensues?

Just some thoughts :D
DirtyMagic
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
 
Posts: 155
Topics: 14
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2003 10:07 pm
Location: Canada (but still south of Wisconsin)

Postby energyman » Mon Nov 17, 2003 5:40 pm

Hi,

well, I am a PK hater. I realy hate this bastards. Yes, I do.

The normal players are not a problem. I bet: the first killing fleet will be build up by a PK to be cooler than his pimple faced friends. The first fleet of overtuned capships killing everything in the game will be owned by a PK or PK Clan.

So, what is the problem? If someone really wants to fuck up anothers day and gets killed, it is his very own problem, nothing the developers should worry about. Players are not a problem. PKs are.

My suggestion: PKs should immediately be marked as 'Pirates' or 'Criminals', with bounty and everything or PKing will kill the fun in VS.
energyman
Merchant
Merchant
 
Posts: 48
Topics: 4
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2003 3:25 pm

Police

Postby ATStriker » Mon Nov 17, 2003 7:09 pm

also, i would be nice to maybe have a couple people from this board act as 'police' with VERY nice capships to settle some arguments should they occur. These 2 or 3 people would be like part-time admins, but without the final server-controlling authority. I, for one, would volenteer.
-"I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the Flame of Anor. You cannot pass. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udun. Go back to the Shadow. You cannot pass!"
ATStriker
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
 
Posts: 148
Topics: 11
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 2:02 pm
Location: Interstellar Space, out of fuel.

Postby Silverain » Mon Nov 17, 2003 7:09 pm

My suggestion: PKs should immediately be marked as 'Pirates' or 'Criminals', with bounty and everything or PKing will kill the fun in VS.


Actually, that's quite a good idea. But this would need to be moderated. For instance: PvP agreements shouldn't trigger this; attacks on hated clans (clan relations) shouldn't change it; and so on.

Would need to be thought out, but it could be something worthwhile here.
THOUGHT CRIME! [points finger] THOUGHT CRIME!
User avatar
Silverain
Expert Mercenary
Expert Mercenary
 
Posts: 984
Topics: 26
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2003 10:35 pm
Location: Brisbane, Land of Oz

police, cont.

Postby ATStriker » Mon Nov 17, 2003 7:13 pm

OH! These people could advance a story! Imagine 2 Unknown capships jump into a key economic system and claim it as their own. The only for the locals to continue their busness as usual (*see below) is to band together and destroy the god-like ships.
Old-style D.A.D plots could be developed within the universe WITHOUT any extra coding!

*Of course, if the ships were controlled by fairly benevolant people, lone traders would not be slughtered if they ignored the plot.
-"I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the Flame of Anor. You cannot pass. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udun. Go back to the Shadow. You cannot pass!"
ATStriker
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
 
Posts: 148
Topics: 11
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 2:02 pm
Location: Interstellar Space, out of fuel.

Re: multiplayer concerns

Postby charlieg » Tue Nov 18, 2003 5:28 am

Wireless Caller wrote:1. destructable stations.. lets this isn't second life of course or trying to make things 100% realistic. but if someone logs off for the night and logs in the morning to see his station not exist anymore.


Well, IMHO no single player should have their own station. Stations should be owned by a group of cooperative individuals. And they should require time, extreme amounts of resources, and construction. The same goes for capital ships. They should be the benefit of working with others, not of individual wealth (although stations/capships should require large sums of wealth to create).

This would solve the 'whilst I'm sleeping' issue in that a sufficient group should always have somebody online. You could also have bots / turrets to defend a base.

Wireless Caller wrote:2. wingman. ok I know that wingmans actually add depths to the game but unfortunitly some players would like to fly alone when going into PvP combat and explore the universe or go on a player killing spree. besides, if this is a multiplayer mode in in TCP/IP, it shouldn't be treated like a single player game. unlike the pk hunter has like 20+ ships for his wingman, and tells his npc to kill this bad guy.


Certain areas of the game should be incredibly well patrolled by an NPC alliance of sorts to provide a safe haven for newcomers. PKers should be recognised somehow and bounty placed on their heads. There are numerous other ways to conquer this.

If somebody wants to amass a large number of wingmen, let them. It will be difficult to control as well as be a lonely existence, and any piracy will lead to a large bounty being placed on them.

Wireless Caller wrote:3. star ships.. i'm not too sure about this feature but as long as players don't get their hands on big giant combat ships such as capital ships/battle ships/destroyers, i've played e&b, and eve-online and played with battleships but there is no skill in pvp what so ever. just point and click.


Again, as stated before, capital ships should be the result of teamwork and hence require several players to fully operate. Large capital ships should be expensive to run and unwieldy. Rogue capital ships will attract bounty.

Wireless Caller wrote:4. NPC bots..


.. are completely necessary to create an initially unhostile environment for newbies.
User avatar
charlieg
Elite Mercenary
Elite Mercenary
 
Posts: 1328
Topics: 56
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 4:51 pm
Location: Manchester, UK

Postby DirtyMagic » Tue Nov 18, 2003 9:46 am

Regarding PK/PvP
People tend to either love PvP or hate it. The challenge to the game designer is to set things up so everyone's happy (like THAT happens...)

I can see things like guilds being able to declare war on one another or players deciding to meet up for a slugging match. In fact, the way VS is set up there's no real reason to kill another player... there's no money gain, no "experience" system, and the cargo you recover is probably not worth the price on your head. Besides, the community so far seems pretty mature. I'll bet PK in VS would be much less of a problem than in a lot of other online games.

Regarding cap ships and stations
I do like the idea of players with wealth being able to set up stations and "take over systems", so long as it doesn't hamper the ability of "little guys" to go about their business trading. It's basically another way for players to generate their own mission types in game. One clan gets together and plots the conquest of a system. That leads to a bunch of other people getting together to free that system from the tyrrannical clutches of Clan Hellcat, just for the hell of it. If people could actually post to the mission boards themselves, they could hire newer players as turret gunners or fighter pilots to either capture or free the system. It brings in PvP but it's all concentual... if you're just in that system to trade, no one bothers you.
DirtyMagic
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
 
Posts: 155
Topics: 14
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2003 10:07 pm
Location: Canada (but still south of Wisconsin)

Postby enlightenment » Tue Nov 18, 2003 4:07 pm

If players can own stations then some kind of effective automated defenses will be necessary for no other reason than preventing station-owners from being bored out of their minds. There's not a whole lot to do with a station other than stare at the radar screens and enable the turrets if someone attacks. It would be a different story if stations needed some degree of administration (buying replacement parts, deciding who docks, allowing other players to rent space aboard for meeting areas or independent trade posts, setting taxes, etc) but for the moment, running a station would be like watching paint dry.

It's not reasonable to require a team of players to maintain 24 hour coverage just to keep a station or capship operational. VS is just a game after all, and providing 24 hour coverage come hell or high water requires a large number of people, especially when no one is being paid for their trouble. If players are allowed to own non-dockable objects then some kind of off-hours protection system will be necessary. Effective autodefenese are one option; simply flagging unoccupied units as indestructable is another.

Keeping highlevel players from using newbies for target practice can be handled both as a matter of policy and game design. Using NPCs to police protected zones will provide some newbie protection but simply having the admins spawn bounty missions against troublemakers is probably going to be more effective in the long run.

Something to consider would be reserving a few classes of very high-power ships (such as the urchin on my Vega Strike page) for use by police NPCs and admins to deal with troublemakers. A horde of cloaked, fighter-sized ships mounting autotracking LR_PminusBeams should be more than enough to keep severe problems from emerging.
enlightenment
Mercenary
Mercenary
 
Posts: 106
Topics: 15
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 5:09 pm

Postby Wireless Caller » Mon Nov 24, 2003 3:36 pm

ok there are 2 ways players can play the multiplayer of vegastrike.

1. if you want a more of a in-depth type of a game, then everything(capital ships etc) is enabled.

2. if you want more of a true player vs player skill type game, then the following should be disabled:

* npc wingman(or My Fleet)
* capital ships
* auto aim

i don't know how things will go with these types. but personally, I like type number 2 better, although its kind of related to quake in space which I also like too.
Wireless Caller
Merchant
Merchant
 
Posts: 43
Topics: 10
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 12:31 pm

Postby Wireless Caller » Mon Nov 24, 2003 3:41 pm

ok there are 2 ways players can play the multiplayer of vegastrike.

1. if you want a more of a in-depth type of a game, then everything(capital ships etc) is enabled.

2. if you want more of a true player vs player skill type game, then the following should be disabled:

* npc wingman(or My Fleet)
* capital ships
* auto aim

i don't know how things will go with these types. but personally, I like type number 2 better, although its kind of related to quake in space which I also like too.
Wireless Caller
Merchant
Merchant
 
Posts: 43
Topics: 10
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 12:31 pm

Postby Wireless Caller » Mon Nov 24, 2003 3:45 pm

ooops i double posted..

stupid connection.
Wireless Caller
Merchant
Merchant
 
Posts: 43
Topics: 10
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 12:31 pm

Postby Antec » Thu Nov 27, 2003 1:46 pm

double post is what kept some people away..

Well I would like to see some multiplayer types..

though people can play any type of style they want.

like small crafts only, or control everything like starships..

though I could make a universe with just small crafts only.

as i figured, small crafts with out wingman and starships would mostlikley be a true player skill based game.. like the old tachyon the frindge made byu nova logic. npc to shoot at if you don't wanna fight other players. ai should be only availible as little small crafts and in bar like freelancer.

wingman and capital ships enabled for a multiplayer server would add a lot of depths in to the game and be focused on stragetic gameplay. i have not gatherd enough information about this feature though. I don't know how much lag it would take up but though its client side though.
Antec
 

Postby Silverain » Thu Nov 27, 2003 4:20 pm

Just a random thought crime on PvP:

Assumption: we have clans down the track. Clan vs Clan battles are permitted.

Until you petition/join a clan, you are classed as an independant. If PvP attacks/kills you, they are then subject to multi, large bounty missions.

Therefore, little incentive to attack newbies, new characters. Once you have flown enough and are interested, you can join clans and be involved in PvP.

Comments, flames welcome :)
THOUGHT CRIME! [points finger] THOUGHT CRIME!
User avatar
Silverain
Expert Mercenary
Expert Mercenary
 
Posts: 984
Topics: 26
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2003 10:35 pm
Location: Brisbane, Land of Oz

Postby pincushionman » Mon Dec 01, 2003 5:57 am

I don't have a lot of experience with massively multiplayer games, but I think the most effective way to control PKing is to take away the motivation to kill another player. In most games, killing another player gives either XP or loot; take away both of these things and the incentive to go around killing goes way down. Not away entirely, of course. But way down.

-pincushionman
Conquer space!
-pincushionman

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

Kansas really is flatter than a pancake!
www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/v ... ansas.html
User avatar
pincushionman
ISO Party Member
ISO Party Member
 
Posts: 467
Topics: 25
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:55 pm
Location: Big, flat Kansas

Postby jump gate hypocrate » Fri Dec 05, 2003 9:14 pm

energyman wrote:My suggestion: PKs should immediately be marked as 'Pirates' or 'Criminals', with bounty and everything or PKing will kill the fun in VS.
Here is a nasty suggestion. What if someone tried to Pking you but you managed to survive and in defending yourself killed the other person? Then perhaps you, the "innocent trader" would be targeted as a criminal? :?
jump gate hypocrate
 

Postby Duality » Fri Dec 05, 2003 10:15 pm

Well if it was by accident, probably no thats if the pilot respawns back to his station. I know how much I hate realism.

If it was permanent death than its a yes.
Duality
Daredevil Venturer
Daredevil Venturer
 
Posts: 583
Topics: 78
Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2003 5:58 pm
Location: West Coast of USA

Postby hurleybird » Sat Dec 06, 2003 12:40 am

jump gate hypocrate wrote:
energyman wrote:My suggestion: PKs should immediately be marked as 'Pirates' or 'Criminals', with bounty and everything or PKing will kill the fun in VS.
Here is a nasty suggestion. What if someone tried to Pking you but you managed to survive and in defending yourself killed the other person? Then perhaps you, the "innocent trader" would be targeted as a criminal? :?


If you are hit first by someone else, than you should not get any PK penalty for killing them.
hurleybird
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 1671
Topics: 64
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 5:46 pm
Location: Earth, Sol system.

Postby Guest » Sat Dec 06, 2003 3:44 pm

hurleybird wrote:If you are hit first by someone else, than you should not get any PK penalty for killing them.
I would think if someone fired at you, you wouldn't be waiting untill they actually hit you. Either you would run or you would kill them
Guest
 

Postby guest » Fri Dec 26, 2003 4:34 pm

If you peeps need a 24/7 server, I have a dedicated server I use for things like CVS and some low usage websites.
I might be able to help out
guest
 

Postby Mr. Surprise » Fri Jan 02, 2004 2:16 pm

one more thing for multiplayer..

there should not be the ability to hire AI wingman to fly on your wing, and have the "My Fleet" section disabled.

its actually what you have players for.

i have never seen a full blown skill based player vs player battles in years from now.
Mr. Surprise
 

Postby pontiac » Sat Jan 03, 2004 5:29 pm

Mr. Surprise wrote:one more thing for multiplayer..

there should not be the ability to hire AI wingman to fly on your wing, and have the "My Fleet" section disabled.

its actually what you have players for.

i have never seen a full blown skill based player vs player battles in years from now.

I only partially agree on the no-AI agument of yours (it was suggested elsewere too).
If you don't find players that want to help you you should at least have the choice to use bots/AIs as your wingmen/whatever. Just don't make them too smart, not cheap and there shouldn't be too many of them to keep the advantage of human players/wingmen.

About the "MyFleet" thing: What happens if i buy myself a few ship and then want to switch to a previous one (to ship cargo/attack capships/etc ...)
I (and i bet you too) mostly use this section to switch between my ships. If one can do more with it i think i have overlooked something ;-)

Pontiac
User avatar
pontiac
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 1454
Topics: 93
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2003 11:24 am
Location: Far out in the uncharted backwaters of the unfashionable end of the western spiral arm of the Galaxy



Return to Vega Strike Online

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron