But that doesn't create the element of threat or danger. It makes me wonder why I'm wasting my time in such a gimmicky place when I could go to other areas of space that are "dangerous" and get interactions without those frustrations. People literally forgo visiting such systems at all because of this.
Since all of space is "dangerous" imagine what the mod would be like if virtually everywhere was like Nomad space. It'd be extremely counter-intuitive to the user experience.
People can intercept and raid players when they're travelling through their space without these gimmicks. What makes Nomads the exception?
Going against the flow, can we implement persistent cd weapon platforms on major lawful hubs that disrupt all sneaking criminals that dare to cross by, when we remove cd from all existing npc spawns?
(07-09-2018, 01:49 PM)Auzari Wrote: Stop flying through secure zones then? Gunboat npcs don't spawn in the wild.
I've never encountered a gunboat patrol outside of house (primary) systems. I don't see reason to remove them entirely because they're doing their job.
Ouh, another discussion of two very opposing points of view. The nomad systems are, while they look nice and different, horribly designed. It does make a big difference whether trade lanes can be disrupted or whether CD-platforms are around that slow the intruders down - the former works only when people are already around. The latter works always and buys more time for a reaction of the playerbase. The danger aspect comes from the people that get the time to log and get to you, as well as from the possible NPCs spawning in the same area (Dur Shurrikun, Iota Gate, Xerna, currently). The exception you ask for is the fact that the nomad systems should be the ultimate bastion of the nomads. Dangerous with each step deeper. This is sadly not provided with the new Iota - Psi and Iota are both catastrophes in terms of conception and require a serious change. The lanes in Iota are mostly benefiting invaders and even visitors can see everything important in less than five minutes just by using the lanes, with or without interception. I could go into detail here even further and what not, but that would generally deviate from the topic. You should be able to get the idea.
I'm by the way still thinking that people should be required to, if they want nomadic materials, go to the nomadic worlds and take the risk, instead of fighting Marduks less than 30K away from stations in Delta. To stay on the matter, this is just another example of why it is pretty handy to have natural environments slowing your progression down in the supposedly dangerous areals. You can have gimmickless "gameplay" anywhere else. The Nomads are, matter of factly, not just something you have anywhere else.
I've been torn on this one, and the same with NPC's in general. Although I find myself swearing to myself when NPC's are in the way, like GB's with CD's...I remind myself that not everyone is a vet, and there has to be some base level of challenge, especially for newcomers.
Having said that, I think its better to put CD's back on VHF's, not gunboats...why? Because you can kill NPC fighters much faster and easier than gunboats, especially when you're in a transport. It may slow you down as often but you could get rid of the ships with CD's faster and get moving past the GB's, instead of the whacky stuff you have to do to avoid being roasted by a swarm of CD gunboats you have no chance of eliminating in most transports.
@"TheUnforgiven" I... suprisingly like idea of CD being on fighters only instead of being removed completely from the NPCs. But on the other hand, I see the points behind the statements made by e.g. @Traxit (gunboats = secured areas).
However.
I've always been supporter of removing CD from heavier capital ships (carriers and battleships MAAAAAYBE cruisers, giving them double CM instead) to have actual cooperation between certain ship classes when it comes to player-to-player cooperation.
Removal of CD from NPC patrols would make sense, as these ships - gunboats especially - act more as defences of secured space and have a passive role.
That would be pretty unlike in case of player gunboats, which would be rather designed to act in active way as actual assault-oriented strike crafts.
User was banned for: User request
Time left: (Permanent)
(07-09-2018, 03:11 PM)Sombra Hookier Wrote: Ouh, another discussion of two very opposing points of view. The nomad systems are, while they look nice and different, horribly designed. It does make a big difference whether trade lanes can be disrupted or whether CD-platforms are around that slow the intruders down - the former works only when people are already around. The latter works always and buys more time for a reaction of the playerbase. The danger aspect comes from the people that get the time to log and get to you, as well as from the possible NPCs spawning in the same area (Dur Shurrikun, Iota Gate, Xerna, currently). The exception you ask for is the fact that the nomad systems should be the ultimate bastion of the nomads. Dangerous with each step deeper. This is sadly not provided with the new Iota - Psi and Iota are both catastrophes in terms of conception and require a serious change. The lanes in Iota are mostly benefiting invaders and even visitors can see everything important in less than five minutes just by using the lanes, with or without interception. I could go into detail here even further and what not, but that would generally deviate from the topic. You should be able to get the idea.
I'm by the way still thinking that people should be required to, if they want nomadic materials, go to the nomadic worlds and take the risk, instead of fighting Marduks less than 30K away from stations in Delta. To stay on the matter, this is just another example of why it is pretty handy to have natural environments slowing your progression down in the supposedly dangerous areals. You can have gimmickless "gameplay" anywhere else. The Nomads are, matter of factly, not just something you have anywhere else.
The only horrible aspect of their design is the CD platforms and high-level NPCs that spawn in places that should be interaction zones for hotspots (correct me if I'm wrong, I can't remember too well if high-level Nomad NPCs spawn at the Gates). The way farming works is fine, as at least surely by next update there will be balanced risk/reward for going after Nomad NPC Battleships in the upper Omicrons. The lanes thing isn't really an issue since all the lanes arrive at Nomad bases or choke points anyway - and they can't stop you from following them since they can't disrupt the lanes themselves (either way, the lanes could just be made disruptable if that's really such a huge issue). The plats/NPCs part of the design is what pushes people away from Iota and discourages activity there - how can it buy more time for Nomads if there's no one even there in the first place? And I repeat my previous point: other factions/systems don't have gimmicks like these, and there are many [bastion of faction systems] so I don't see why Nomads specifically need them for any gameplay or roleplay reasons. Systems like Iota feel much akin to old Guard Systems, which would be chock full of high damaging plats and NPCs - these were removed. It doesn't feel dangerous being in Iota, it's just annoying and at worst makes me want to go somewhere else. It's like being bitten by a gnat.
The problem when it comes to design and conceptualisation is that people confuse 'atmosphere' with 'danger'. What they want to achieve is making the systems feel more atmospheric, dangerous and remote. What's achieved is making them irritating and tedious, and in the case of the Omicrons, for all players except Nomads IDs. Old redesigned Delta, with high-level Nomad NPCs everywhere, was god awful. It turned people off from interacting. Even worse so that in terms of gameplay Nomad IDs were entirely unaffected whilst other IDs did suffer (being hostile to the Nomad NPCs, as well as their own NPCs being utterly pathetic to Nomad players). I don't see why Nomads are so special and should be given gameplay mechanics to the detriment of others. It's that same sort of logic that left Nomads with OP, gameplay detrimental, stuff for so long. I'd actually argue that AI are less visible in Sirius than Nomads - yet they do not have nor require high-level NPCs and CD plats dotted throughout Kappa.
You want danger in a system? Be the danger. NPCs and platforms are barely threatening, they're just annoying. Death to NPCs doesn't leave a player dead for 2 hours, for example. Mechanics should encourage players to log and create interaction, not let them lazily sit back and have the system do all the work - or discourage interaction completely.
Lyth, I really wonder when you accept the fact that the player count is so low, fluctuating and disperse that you can never expect people to do the job you want them to do. We have static assets for that. That is what they are for. They literally exist to provide a game that is to be enjoyed by players. They log in because they want it. They don't log in because you want it.
How do anti-player mechanics create activity? I'm literally telling you why people don't want to interact with Nomads in the Nomad systems (which leads to fewer interactions and reduced player count, by the way). I've accepted the player count is low, and I'm pointing out why and ways to change that. And regards to making the game something that can be enjoyed by players: these mechanics don't create an enjoyable game - except perhaps for all but Nomad players.
Do people remember when the Rho holes used to be blocked by Core Battleships and Battlecruisers that would kill anything that jumped in? Y'know, these static assets would help do some damage to the intruders before The Core playerbase came along to kill them - Rho was a 'bastion' system. Sarcasm aside, these irritated players and only succeeded in deterring activity from Rho, and only yielded an exclusive benefit for Core players. It's the same thing with Iota - just a different ID.
Also, I don't understand, you're criticising me for wanting players to log in and create activity? Lol.