Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Proposed PW changes for round 8

40 posts, 1553 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
Page of 2 (40 records)
sort


12 years ago
We need to make the game more suitable for casual players and less able to dominate easilly.

Currently considering:
  • give homeworld huge starting influence and some "capital" structure which makes credits and cannot be destroyed
  • reduce clan size limit to 6
  • make it possible to bomb anywhere (not respecting links)
  • make bomb reduce all IP on planet
  • make repair cost only 50% of credits
  • make it impossible to buy from locals
  • make linking influence stronger
  • make it possible to swap ownership within own clan
  • make high player count clan influence gain diminishing (4 players = sqrt(4) x 1 player gain) or change the influence completely (to say ignore XP and always be 100infl/game).
  • make infinite ship storage but limited ship fleet size when invading/bombing planet

If you have more simple ideas, post them!

+0 / -0


12 years ago
  • bombing would only reduce influence if there is no structure left to bomb
  • planets with lots of enemy influence will be less productive (less income, higher building cost) - giving incentive to buy up influence there
  • leaving clan will erase influence
+0 / -0
12 years ago
I like the homeworld idea, but be careful with it, because now everyone will want one. That will lead to many 1 player clans, whereas I think PW will profit from a few full and active clans battling for domination. Or would you consider 1 homeworld per player rather than 1 per clan?

Love the infinite ship storage idea. Think buying from locals also has its value, would like to keep it. Maybe make the cost increase for clans with many planets?

How about a maximum number of structures per planet? At least the techs should be limited I think, to maybe 2 per planet max? Will spread them out more, making them more of a resource.

And I think if clan size is lowered to 6, maybe the 500 influence level should be lowered a bit as well? Maybe 300-400? Really I think 10 or even 25 would be a nice size, except there's not enough active players playing in PW.. :(

I notice there are still many players that are playing without joining a clan. It would be nice if we can somehow trigger them to also play PW competitively. Maybe through some PW unlockables, or is that going to far?
+0 / -0
12 years ago
Looking at the suggestions
Homeworld Buffs: Fine with me. Making it a real homeworld that takes tons of attacks would be cool. I would advise although if such is done that there be some way to force the gifted planet to not be adjacent to other homeworlds if possible.

Clan Size Reduction:Im ok with this I guess. Really as I said, I haven't see more than 2-3 players to a clan on more than once(and that was IUSP 2 seasons back), and really alot of the time it has been 1-2 people in a clan who push and rise the along.(ie Odin, Crutch, and ConTrust in Vahalla. Me, Maackey, and later on Noob in 1uP) Would make alliances and ceasefires more important although.

Bomb Buffs: I didn't know there was a drop area limit. Id be careful although about bombing IP, as the rich player could just spam it.

Prevent Local Buying: 50-50. It is an interesting concept, but with prevention being experinsive, it is becoming heavily spammed, especially once a player or clan get a strong lead. In some ways Id still like the see it, but the cost to prevent it needs to be less.

Swap Ownership: Yes please! Or at the very least make it so all members of the clan can build on a planet, not just the owner.

Influence Link: Looking at my planets, its preety strong as is with the change in IP scale. Maybe boost it a little, but not by much.

Diminishing Clan Influence: Meh...I don't think its a good idea to reduce the advantage of playing with your clan, as it will only cause for less interest in PW, so no.

Infinite Ship Storage: Not needed in my opinion, even this will adjust strategies. Not to mention it will pretty much play into the hands of the active player.

Outside of that, Maackey Suggested creating some sort of "Clan Bank" that members could deposit to for use by any clanner. I think that would be a good idea, as would the "Clean Slate" effect you suggested that would occur if a player leaves a clan mid-game.
+0 / -0


12 years ago
Problem with local buying preventer is battles.
During battle, preventer structure could be killed and then it depends on speed - will you buy inluence faster than enemy repairs preventer?


Infinite ship storage will reward less active players more! Atm you need to spend your 3 ships or its wasted, if player is new/careles its easy to overflow and extra ships are wasted.

+0 / -0
12 years ago
Ent: Id rather it be at least 300-400 if not as is. Having to either throw all your resource or fight several times to secure the planet is better than someone stealing a planet cause you failed a drop. The higher limits have also bettered the ability of influence in my opinion.

Licho: That is a good thing in my opinion, as really right now most players seem to completly ignore planet structures on the battlefield. In the end I think Local buying was and is a good idea, but at the current buy rates, is just too abuseable, and in some ways may be best to be tossed.

Looking at it now, the infinite ship limit does sound like a good idea, and definitly opens it up for some interesting strategies(say, saving over several battles to open a massive fleet on an enemy or bombing their planet into the stone ages)
+0 / -0


12 years ago
Problem is we dont hav emuch room in icons for extra "influence buying preventer". It will likely be tied to defensive structure, which is auto destroyed in invasion and cannot be bombed.
+0 / -0
12 years ago
you have a point there, in the end really I only see 2 ways to not make local buying as abusable.

1.Make level 2 defense have the preventer(cheaper, forces the opponent to use more resources to complete such an action)
2.Increase the cost to buy from locals by at least double.

If neither of those really work...then maybe it is best to just not have it. I will say although if that's true, then the game is going to end up more structured towards branching out clusters instead of the random outposts as it had become this season.
+0 / -0
12 years ago
Diminishing Influence gain for repeated attack on the same planet within a time period.
+0 / -0
12 years ago
*give homeworld huge starting influence and some "capital" structure which makes credits and cannot be destroyed.- Absolutely nice.

*reduce clan size limit to 6, horrible, we already need more room, or the game will detroy the few big clans?

*make it possible to bomb anywhere (not respecting links) actuay that will make life easy for big clans, if that worked this season we ould have won by now.

* make bomb reduce all IP on planet, dont know about that then, big clans can just bombard a okanet until nothing is left, and fight 1 batttle to conquer it?

* make repair cost only 50% of credits great idea

* make it impossible to buy from locals dont know dont care.

* make linking influence stronger yeah absoutely.

* make it possible to swap ownership within own clan YEAH.

* make high player count clan influence gain diminishing (4 players = sqrt(4) x 1 player gain) or change the influence completely (to say ignore XP and always be 100infl/game). Dont like cause i only play planet wars so i can play with my clan, playing with your clan less effective? i dont like that.

* make infinite ship storage but limited ship fleet size when invading/bombing planet, can help but its a double bladed sword.


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


I like the idea of the clan leader being able to select the clan home planet.

Lets say have 3 days for only selection of homeworlds.

Also, alliance must be more important like, if you and your ally clan have meet the winning conditions then Pw is over and so anounce clan a and clan b alliance conquered the galaxy.


not anyone can create a clan, if only some players can create a clan, then less clans = more clans with more players, and in fact make the clan limit up to 20-30.


Who can make a clan? ok lest say PW season start with no clans at all, so you play and you win universal IP (it only is usefull to create a clan) you need 2000 universal IP to create a clan, but universal IP can be given, so a group of friends just play and give the UIP to the clan leader so they can create the clan.

And lets say you win 10 UIP per battle, so it is really soething creating a clan, and clans do stay in for next seasons, so that way we start the galaxy as just mercs, then a clan, then and empire etc...



+0 / -0
12 years ago
Ohh also maybe not for this season but why not designate 2-4 really active players to lead 4 factions on the universe, then players pick a faction, and we have some wars, the goal is to conquer the other faction homeworld by getting to it (each faction starts on a coner of the universe, the faction with the 4 home planets win PW.

or something like that.

make prices, like custom color for your com, or something.

+0 / -0
Skasi
12 years ago
What about simply making it more fair? I think that would greatly increase chances of casual players winning!!

Starship production being shipyard levels * games played per day is exponential, if you think about it. The more games you play the more shipyard levels you will have. So your ship output will be something like the following:
n*games per day^2

I suggest generating ships for every PW player for every battle, every hour or something similar. Oh wait, but I already said that a dozen times!
+0 / -0


12 years ago
Ships control what map is played and they are basically voting. They have to be produced from activity not from time.
Basically you gain 1 vote each time you play on map you didnt pick.
+0 / -0
12 years ago
Hmm...to be cash is inactive production item in that, and really all you need is 1 ship to be able to do drops. People just need to learn to spread out ships, and dedicate funds to tech.

This is of course also why the ship limit is sort of required in some ways, as the active player producing ships much faster than the casual player, and thus can stockpile ships, which he could use to simply stamp out the casual player's attacks.
+0 / -0
12 years ago
Some ideas
*More FFA for planets?
*Tech buff for the clans who directly have the planet that contains special unit/weapon?
*Epic last battle a everyone VS the clan who wins?
+0 / -0
12 years ago
Please remove chicken planets?
+0 / -0


12 years ago
There are not enough non-chicken maps to match planets. Suggest good map that works and isnt used in pw already
+0 / -0


12 years ago
Some map ideas here - http://zero-k.info/Forum/NewPost?threadID=739 :)
+0 / -0
12 years ago
i think hearthbreaker 2 isnt in pw and is a great map.
+0 / -0
12 years ago
on top of PW-map it would be nice to see not just the leading clan in the different winning conditions, but also the second and third
+0 / -0
Page of 2 (40 records)