Warpin Loss Penalty: Time on Warpin clock

posted on July 8th, 2011, 4:51 pm

Well, then warpins can't be balanced if Star Fleet demands realism from FO oO

making warpin count random does not solve the problem. What it does is, that it gives an advantage to a lucky player. With 1 ship first and 2 ships afterwards it might not be nerdlistic but at least the early game gets fixed in some way.

posted on July 8th, 2011, 5:30 pm

Yeah, but a lucky player will win every time.   What it does is decrease your chances of getting three warpins from 100%(or close to it) to 50% and you are much more likely to get less than that than more.

[Anonymous]

posted on July 8th, 2011, 6:07 pm

Last edited by Anonymous on July 8th, 2011, 6:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

i made this idea (random number of warpins) before.

in retrospect its crap 

right now a lucky warpin rusher can get rhode island and centaur, and crush you.

imagine if they got 4 ships, even all e1, thats like 9000 torps in your face

sadly we cant add more randomness to sfc, it would be very realistic, but sometimes life is unfair, and games shouldnt be unfair, games are for fun, not realism.

im happy with sometimes less than 3, or sometimes damaged warpins arrive, but never more than 3.

about worthiness, i see that reflected in the tech requirements for sfc. you need to have yard and 2 tech buildings then sfc itself before warpins will come to help you. ie you need to have 2 research facilities, a starbase, and an office complex with admirals and stuff before your base is important enough for starfleet to start reassigning ships to help you.

posted on July 8th, 2011, 8:55 pm

Until the SFC is moved to higher tech level or the warpin ships are changed, Fed can't be balanced. See how much time I saved you all?

I guess I'll see everyone here next week for our scheduled "Rehash pages of repetitive arguments and talk in circles before devolving into a flamewar, continuing the previously described the cycle for months on end until a new patch comes out that makes the Feds even stronger." topic.

posted on July 8th, 2011, 9:03 pm

nobody was close to flaming until you showed up.

posted on July 8th, 2011, 11:52 pm

That wasn't flaming. Sarcastic, pointless, and meant in jest, yes.

posted on July 9th, 2011, 3:22 am

Why not offer diminishing returns on the use of SC?  First use, 15 secs added to the cd.  Second, 20 secs added.  Third, 25 secs added to the cd.  Then cap it there.  It reduces by 5 seconds if a vessel is destroyed.  Or something to that effect.  The numbers don't have to be exactly like that.

posted on July 9th, 2011, 3:58 am

Increasing a cooldown because a ship is destroyed is honestly hard to fathom coding wise.

posted on July 9th, 2011, 1:22 pm

Random number of ships seems like a good idea to me because then a player can't depend on 3 ships t save them. If a player warped in offensively and got 1 ship, I think they would have a problem.

I'd even be happy if the most common number was 2, but you had a good chance for 3, slightly smaller for 1 and much smaller for 4.

posted on July 9th, 2011, 2:16 pm

Seems to me too much boo-whoing is going on or someone just got wooped. It appears the key issue some people have are people using the warp in too early in the game and warping the ships straight in to attack you mining stations. If this is the case, and needs to be fixed, why not have the ships warp into a unchangeable location such as outside SFC or withing a certain radius of your base. If too early is a problem, why not make SFC more expensive to build in the first place. Other than that, there isn't much more you can simply do as it already does require alot of capital and time be able to build SFC as it is one of the last structures you can build. Perhapes you could set a once off cooling period of a minute or two after construction.

But in the end, is it worth whinging about. Like I know I don't play alot of multiply games as I'm pretty busy, but every other race has their little area which gives them the edge (eg cloak early in game and can scout you out, heavily battleships that will nail you later in game). Sorry to be a grinch, but war has never been fair and I know people will still complain even if all sides were the same.

posted on July 9th, 2011, 2:27 pm

Like I know I don't play alot of multiply games as I'm pretty busy,

So you are out of the discussion then. This is about multiplayer balance. And warpins are not balanced in early game right now. It has to do with getting lots of good ships for free in early and mid game without any effort.

posted on July 9th, 2011, 3:14 pm

He makes a good point though.   What if you had to research the option(from SFC) to request ships at a certain location?  Until then, they came straight to the station.

posted on July 10th, 2011, 1:56 am

He makes a good point though.   What if you had to research the option(from SFC) to request ships at a certain location?  Until then, they came straight to the station.

That, or simply add a good deal of build time and some slight cost to SFC. The main issue to me is time, how quickly the warpins can be summoned. If you just increase the time, the warpin rush loses a good deal of its frustrating all-round usefulness.

posted on July 10th, 2011, 5:51 am

If I didnt agree with the not being able to build super old retired ships but still want them in game, I would say remove warpins entirely. They are just such a balancing hassle and no matter what you do free ships will be a problem in some way.

Also, I had ideas but I give up. Warpins need a huge rethink or we are going to have these threads for as long as at least two people play FO besides the devs.

[Tyler]

posted on July 10th, 2011, 9:18 am

Last edited by Tyler on July 10th, 2011, 10:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

I don't think the threads will ever stop without it being removed entirely...