+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+--- Thread: Jumphole Overhaul (/showthread.php?tid=157354)
RE: Jumphole Overhaul - Thyrzul - 07-11-2018
If there is a confusion, then it is on your side. The idea is to focus players into certain pathways in order to increase player density and increase interaction-frequency even with this overall scarce playerbase. Karlotta proposes to achieve that with rearranging system connections. Batavia warns that economy cannot be neglected during the process or the whole won't have the desired effect. Antonio points out that stellarographic and economic (re)design go hand in hand. System connections are as much a gameplay feature, with its own function and mechanics, as economy is. The goal is the same, the proposed ideas to achieve that goal vary. I hope this clears it up.
RE: Jumphole Overhaul - Manu - 07-11-2018
Jump holes aren't shortcuts. Trade lanes are the highways in the systems. Takes way more time moving in between jump holes than trade lanes. Official factions cant promote use of jump holes anyway. Jump holes are the ways for unlawful to move around. So if a particular faction member whether is miner or transport decides to go through a jump hole, hes doing it at his own risk. The time compensation or penalty lies in where the particular jump hole is placed in the map. So this basically increases RP opportunities as well as to improve depth to the economy as faction members are faced with the opportunity variant with risk factor.
RE: Jumphole Overhaul - Hubjump - 07-11-2018
Could we link major to those proposed apart from the 58 hole is redirected to somewhere bordering gallia? that'd be neato to have noms in frogland to confused them.
RE: Jumphole Overhaul - Manu - 07-11-2018
(07-11-2018, 04:31 PM)Gardarik Wrote: The RP for many factions is limited to their ZOI so there isn't much troubles about traversing far as they have nothing to do that far. Even despite I play as Coalition with unlimited ZOI, there are almost no incentives that would make me go to Liberty however long/short the route is. Ease of access will not change much if there is no goal of going somewhere. What's the point of a convenient mug if there is nothing to drink? Batavia indicated correctly regarding trading, but that solution pertains to trading only by creating trading nodes where all traders would fancy going because of lucrative deals and pirates would follow their prey. It is a good solution because gives incentives for traders to go to a specific point rather than forcing them to take certain routes. If you look at real-life marine trading, you will see that due to revenue being concentrated in a few spots, ships choose the same most optimal in terms of time/benefit routes despite almost endless number of alternative routes.
Good point.
RE: Jumphole Overhaul - Lythrilux - 07-11-2018
Rho>55 is one way hole when
RE: Jumphole Overhaul - Batavia - 07-11-2018
(07-11-2018, 04:31 PM)Gardarik Wrote:(07-11-2018, 08:30 AM)Batavia Wrote: Where do you get credits? Missions?
Nowadays, mostly missions. Sometimes, mining. I am deadly sick of trading and am not going back. Besides, I have a few ships and have no need for more.
That's fair. I admit to having a bit of a blind spot when it comes to missions, as I never really found them enjoyable. However, an economics overhaul could easily include a mission area overhaul along the same principles. When it comes to mining, I should've clarified that I'd consider it an integral part of hauling. Yes, miners might not be covering large distances, but the choices of mining locations and drop-off points are predicated on the same kind of logic.
(07-11-2018, 04:31 PM)Gardarik Wrote:(07-11-2018, 04:01 PM)Manu Wrote: I think there's a bit of confusion here. You guys are thinking game play wise and its functions, like economy. Karlotta is talking about reinvigorating RP in the game considering the decrease in server population. She basically states this in the first sentence and reiterates this in several posts. Jump holes are basically the medium of transportation for Pirates and Smugglers, not made for Transports, Freighters or General Public. Yeah it might have an impact in economy but this directly affects the mayor pillars of the game RP and Server numbers. So several sacrifices may have to happen sooner or later unless there's another work around this issue.
The RP for many factions is limited to their ZOI so there isn't much troubles about traversing far as they have nothing to do that far. Even despite I play as Coalition with unlimited ZOI, there are almost no incentives that would make me go to Liberty however long/short the route is. Ease of access will not change much if there is no goal of going somewhere. What's the point of a convenient mug if there is nothing to drink? Batavia indicated correctly regarding trading, but that solution pertains to trading only by creating trading nodes where all traders would fancy going because of lucrative deals and pirates would follow their prey. It is a good solution because gives incentives for traders to go to a specific point rather than forcing them to take certain routes. If you look at real-life marine trading, you will see that due to revenue being concentrated in a few spots, ships choose the same most optimal in terms of time/benefit routes despite almost endless number of alternative routes.
Yeah, pretty much this.
I would like to add that this happens because of large amounts of locally concentrated labour being available. Translated to Freelancer, it means that systems with inhabited planets should be the only locations where you'd find manufacturing bases, as well as being the only places where manufactured products are ever traded. Realistically, because price elasticity (or "dynamic pricing" as people like to call it) is not present in Freelancer, haulers should only ever be able to buy and sell consumer goods on planets, and never in unsettled border and edge world systems. Being able to sell 5000 crates of highly profitable whiskey on a space station inhabited by a 100 people in an otherwise completely empty system is the scourge of Discovery. These kinds of opportunities should simply not exist .. but they are rife throughout Sirius and make 0 sense, both from an economic point of view as an activity one. These kind of small stations in the middle of nowhere should every only exist for repair and resupply (bots) purposes. In fact I'd even argue in favour of shifting ammo resupply and ship repair capabilities to only the larger bases that have the space and modules for them, rather than allowing just any random base to do those things. It would create naturally occurring ZOI's by making certain types of ships and armaments easier or harder to supply depending on the region they're in, and it opens up whole new possibilities of gameplay without really having to tinker with complex machinery like FLhook.
For example: Energy weapons scale up badly because they require reactors of ever-increasing scale and complexity, which severely limiting their rates of fire as the reactors take up more and more space to manufacture ordinances on site with only limited personnel available. Even slight damage to the reactor could take a ship completely out of combat. Whereas smaller ships can cope easily with this problem because of higher reactor output to weapon energy requirement and higher mobility, it is problematic for large battleships because it essentially makes them sitting ducks once their reactors go down. You'd therefore expect battleships to primarily stock up on physical ordinance which can be easily manufactured off-site. It essentially makes them mobile missile platforms capable of delivering massive amounts of firepower in a very short spaces of time with limited amounts of personnel. The trade-off is that they are heavily dependant on supply lines. This gives them limited ZOI's as they can only restock in core House systems. They could conceivably be used for hit-and-run tactics, but they'd be vulnerable as soon as they run out of ammo, which is how you take them down.
On the other end of the scale you have small ships, which simply do not have the storage space to carry large amounts of ammo, but which have reactors that are big enough relative to ship size to comfortably put holes in other ships of the same class, while being able to go long distances without any kind of resupply. They are the ships and weapons you'd expect to be used in unsafe space, by pirates, miners and haulers alike. Their firepower is limited, but in the absence of local supply depots of physical ordinance for pretty much anyone, they're enough.
Then, in between both types, you have the medium-sized ships that carry both physical ordinance and energy weapons. They are typically ships with mission-specific loadouts. They are flexible enough to be able to take on a variety of enemies, as long as they're not too big or too many, and they can go longer ranges, but they still require larger facilities for repairs and resupplies eventually. Their action radius is big enough for a ZOI to extend past core House territory, but not big enough to be able to just go anywhere indefinitely as they'd eventually still run out of ordinances against ships of the same class, or packs of smaller ships hunting them.
Implementing these three different types of ships with different action radii achieves a number of things:
1) It puts a soft cap on ZOI out of combat, and a hard cap on ZOI in combat, ending the need for rule-enforced ZOI's.
2) It removes the need of respawn rules because battles end when one side runs out of bullets rather than pilots, enforcing an attrition-based ruleset that feeds back on economics. This means smaller but better supplied groups stand a much better chance of defending their home turf, greatly reducing the scourge of unfriendly capital ships just taking over entire systems far from home, while still giving pirate raider groups the opportunity to do short hit-and-runs.
3) It creates an environment for actual House-on-House warfare through the use of strategically placed player-owned bases that can be used as repair and supply depots, with House-affiliated haulers supplying said depots by contract, meaning players can slowly build up supply lines, requiring planning and contracting, while other players can attack those supply lines.
4) The eventual outcome of this is creative destruction of overly fat player wallets through making war worth engaging in.
All this, however, is only possible if the economy is restructured first in accordance with my earlier posts. There's no point in strategic warfare or supply lines when every base and every mining field in every system is worth just as much as every other one, and when every base is just as useful to militairy pilots. There are simply no hard, strategic decisions to make in-game, with Discovery's real warfare happening through trying to talk developers into doing one thing or another. Fun for faction leaders, I guess, but not so much for everyone else.
Would this be a big task? Yeah, definitely. But it'd create a hell of a lot of new content to engage in through what essentially amounts to just editing base commodities and ship loadouts. The only required scripting part I can think of is making POB's able to hold finite ammo and bot inventories.
RE: Jumphole Overhaul - Batavia - 07-11-2018
(07-11-2018, 07:50 PM)Manu Wrote: Jump holes aren't shortcuts. Trade lanes are the highways in the systems. Takes way more time moving in between jump holes than trade lanes. Official factions cant promote use of jump holes anyway. Jump holes are the ways for unlawful to move around. So if a particular faction member whether is miner or transport decides to go through a jump hole, hes doing it at his own risk. The time compensation or penalty lies in where the particular jump hole is placed in the map. So this basically increases RP opportunities as well as to improve depth to the economy as faction members are faced with the opportunity variant with risk factor.
Ugh, just stop. That's not how trade works. Traders always, always, always take the less risky option because predictable continuity delivers better, more consistent results than high risk taking. Haulers operate repetitively, doing the same thing over and over again. They don't do risk-reward analysis on the basis of a single trip. Besides, whether a trip has one, three or a thousand alternatively routes is utterly irrelevant because, on average, every trader will consistently take the same route as everyone else because eventually everyone figures out the one most profitable route and abandons all others. Adding, removing and relocation parts of a route just forces everyone to explore different routes, and they'll invariably all start using the same route as everyone else again. Highways and choke points come to exist because every alternative is worse, not because there aren't any other roads.
RE: Jumphole Overhaul - Manu - 07-11-2018
(07-11-2018, 08:33 PM)Batavia Wrote:(07-11-2018, 07:50 PM)Manu Wrote: Jump holes aren't shortcuts. Trade lanes are the highways in the systems. Takes way more time moving in between jump holes than trade lanes. Official factions cant promote use of jump holes anyway. Jump holes are the ways for unlawful to move around. So if a particular faction member whether is miner or transport decides to go through a jump hole, hes doing it at his own risk. The time compensation or penalty lies in where the particular jump hole is placed in the map. So this basically increases RP opportunities as well as to improve depth to the economy as faction members are faced with the opportunity variant with risk factor.
Ugh, just stop. That's not how trade works. Traders always, always, always take the less risky option because predictable continuity delivers better, more consistent results than high risk taking. Haulers operate repetitively, doing the same thing over and over again. They don't do risk-reward analysis on the basis of a single trip. Besides, whether a trip has one, three or a thousand alternatively routes is utterly irrelevant because, on average, every trader will consistently take the same route as everyone else because eventually everyone figures out the one most profitable route and abandons all others. Adding, removing and relocation parts of a route just forces everyone to explore different routes, and they'll invariably all start using the same route as everyone else again. Highways and choke points come to exist because every alternative is worse, not because there aren't any other roads.
Basically what I said. Which means jump holes won't directly affect the trading system as it is. So yes both the economic system and jump holes can be worked upon solving these issues.
BTW could you please post your opinion without continuously making snappish remarks? Thank you.
RE: Jumphole Overhaul - Isha - 07-11-2018
Just make one trading and one smuggling route to be active for a week after which another route would be activated. Inactive routes would need to have their prices significantly dropped for this duration.
This way you'll get an active hub which will then relocate making it easier for pirates to meet traders and the other way around. Pirates could then engage in rivalisation with each other whereever ID allows.
RE: Jumphole Overhaul - Batavia - 07-12-2018
(07-11-2018, 09:38 PM)Manu Wrote:(07-11-2018, 08:33 PM)Batavia Wrote:(07-11-2018, 07:50 PM)Manu Wrote: Jump holes aren't shortcuts. Trade lanes are the highways in the systems. Takes way more time moving in between jump holes than trade lanes. Official factions cant promote use of jump holes anyway. Jump holes are the ways for unlawful to move around. So if a particular faction member whether is miner or transport decides to go through a jump hole, hes doing it at his own risk. The time compensation or penalty lies in where the particular jump hole is placed in the map. So this basically increases RP opportunities as well as to improve depth to the economy as faction members are faced with the opportunity variant with risk factor.
Ugh, just stop. That's not how trade works. Traders always, always, always take the less risky option because predictable continuity delivers better, more consistent results than high risk taking. Haulers operate repetitively, doing the same thing over and over again. They don't do risk-reward analysis on the basis of a single trip. Besides, whether a trip has one, three or a thousand alternatively routes is utterly irrelevant because, on average, every trader will consistently take the same route as everyone else because eventually everyone figures out the one most profitable route and abandons all others. Adding, removing and relocation parts of a route just forces everyone to explore different routes, and they'll invariably all start using the same route as everyone else again. Highways and choke points come to exist because every alternative is worse, not because there aren't any other roads.
Basically what I said. Which means jump holes won't directly affect the trading system as it is. So yes both the economic system and jump holes can be worked upon solving these issues.
BTW could you please post your opinion without continuously making snappish remarks? Thank you.
It's the complete opposite of your low risk, low reward / high risk, high reward idea of things, but whatever.