Gameplay Question...

[Chikara]

I'd have to say keep the self destruct as it is... no penalty... but have a 20-30 second delay. That removes the use during combat for escape. Also make it where you can hit the key again to stop the self destruct if you hit it by accident.

Otherwise just get rid of it... you can do the same thing by exiting w/o saving and then reloading.

[BraveHart]

I like how it is now....F7 is a jettison and self destruct key that works as it is suppose too."Gotta self destruct so the enemy can't have any spare parts and I get to live to fight another time" works for me . Using it in dock is a great way to change the inventory to buy the missiles or other weapons that you want...at least it is quicker . If the Klingons or whoever wants to reload using it that's fine with me....it at least gives you a greater challenge . This is one Great Game and a Hoot to play I would get bored if I won all of the time.....As I see the new pilots progress and become more able to hold their own the less I see of the F7 key being used in combat. Think of it as a learning aid for those that need it.....the more experienced pilots use it only when necessary .

"Great Flying and Hunting"

[PingBosun]

I know its a game, but there does, I believe, need to be some realism. If we can create "No Combat Zones", then the ability to use all the weapons, F7 and re-arm fully immediately is just wrong.


Ok another chain of thought. The F7 is the "Eject" key - get out of the broken craft and survive. From an enemy point of view its a kill - the craft ain't going to fly again, but the pilot is.

So when the pilot gets a new ship, he needs to be back at a station to get it. In which case it can either be supplied fully armed with the previous load out, or empty of missiles, or at the same state as the old craft just before F7. To be able to fully re-arm in the middle of a battle just aint right.

But its not my game and whatever happens I will still contuniue to play cos, like Tony the Tiger says, "Its G-R-E-E-E-E-A-A-A-T!"

[tha_rami]

Oops, yeah, reading back that post I did get a bit dragged away. But it's exactly as PingBosun says, the way it is now 'is just wrong'.

Still, from the poll it appears 50% is against penalty and 50% is in favor.

Unpopular - yeah, tax raises are unpopular too - but usually they're for the sake of a countries infrastructure, health care and other things. I think this is the same: those who are used to free reloading will hate our guts for such a decision, but it will be great for the games' balance and fun-factor.

[Edited on 6-9-2008 by tha_rami]

[Nigel_Strange]

This is a game, not a country, so I don't have to support your infrastructure. The insinuation that I am somehow "freeloading" by trying to enjoy a game that I own is a little off the mark in my book.

"I can't think of any game that doesn't have some penalty for getting destroyed. Don't you think the player should lose anything?"

Pretty much EVERY game that I play works this way: You die. Game over. You load the last good save game and try again. That's one of the things that makes games fun to play (and unlike life, in which there are severe consequences for mistakes). You can go back to the last good save and start from there. I do not think the player should lose anything. And if I DID lose anything, where does this loss go? Does my credit sacrifice go toward feeding hungry babies? Does my lost time go to building roads? No. My sacrifice does NOT improve anyone's infrastructure. It's just a silly sacrifice demanded by other players who either want to punish me or at least "annoy" me because they don't really want me to enjoy the game.

So, raising taxes is unpopular, but it's an outrage when those taxes are not even spent for anything.

I don't know what the percentage of single/multiplayer players is, but every time I checked the status of servers (with few exceptions) they were either empty or nearly empty, so for this reason (and others) I, and probably the majority of players who don't even post on this thread (but are still entitled to enjoy their purchase) are playing the game solo. We do not want the multiplayers to keep ruining the game for us.

So, if you want to mess around with multiplayer, that's fine by me. Do what you want. Just leave the single-player game out of this. There is, absolutely, no reason that the single player game players should be penalized, punished, annoyed, or taxed just to fulfill your bizarre need for universal "justice." It's a game. People play it to enjoy it, not to satisfy some weird set of karmic law enforcement codes.

[tha_rami]

Actually, my main concern IS single-player. That's why I came with the whole idea, so that you, wanting to be able to reload, are able to, and I, wanting to be punished a bit for taking stupid risks but not lose everything - can do so as well. It does also add to progress, as battles that would first result in definite loss of credits can suddenly be profitable because you got better/are better equipped.

And hey, take it easy now. I enjoy a game in which death carries penalties because it makes the game more exciting thus more fun. If you're in any way insinuating I'm 'odd' or 'weird' by wanting this, I'd consider myself offended - I am not talking about you wanting to be some 'weird freeloader' either, nor am I wanting to satisfy some 'weird set of karmic codes'. I just want to enjoy my game.

The taxes/your loss would go to whoever shot the crap out of you, just as you can loot enemies. That doesn't sound like a concept too hard to grasp, does it now? Having this possibility stops you from taking on a force of 300 better equipped enemies (which you could do in the current situation as if you're going to a supermarket), but does not stop you from exploring, picking battles and taking contracts.

It would add to the feeling of danger in red zones, it would add to the feeling of safety in green zones. Now, green and red are essentially the same, save for the little 'restore to twenty seconds ago' screen every time you do something stupid. I'm all for having you respawn, and having the option of pulling out of the game to restore your last save. I fail to see how I'm doing injustice to your enjoyment of the game, since restoring is perfectly available in the game with this feature.

By the way, you're completely and totally missing the analogy. The game is the country, the taxes are whatever you keep/lose when dying and you are the player. Raising the punishment is unpopular, but it would improve the game. Raising taxes is unpopular - but it would improve the country.

[Vice]

Another important consideration since a few of you say such penalties would make the game more fun to you. Such a change to F7 (and this is only about F7, not anything else atm) would force players to accept those penalties, yet they can already apply them voluntarily now. If you want to have to respawn at a station, you can save at one voluntarily, then not save during battle. When you respawn, if you don't want to be allowed to keep your weapons, you can sell them off or discard them before undocking. This option can be agreed to by all players who wish to have the same penalties applied to them. So the option is already voluntarily available, yet those who have been using multiplayer over the past few months have not employed it and haven't requested it during gameplay (that I can recall anyway, especially the regular players). What we're talking about here is forcing the condition on players, many of which do not want to have such a thing forced on them (including and especially those who have been using multiplayer the most).

[MMaggio]

Dear Nigel, I agree with you 100%.
"You load from the last good save and try again."
That's the whole point. We aren't talking about "dying" here. What we're trying to restrict is the apparent wanton use of the F7 key. Currently, by using F7, a player just respawns right back where he was with the same load out he had when he hit F7 the first time.
In single player who cares? But in MP, it allows the player to use all his weapons, then respawn with the same loadout as if he never used the weapons.
If everytime a player died and respawned in a hanger and had to start from there, there would be wails of complaints from the MP crowd.
However, you made an excellent point and I agree that the apparent vocal minority from the MP crowd should not dictate how you & others in SP play the game.
And, since we all know I am against "rules", I will no longer argue for it.
Keep the faith...

[Klingon Kahless]

No F7's were used in MP just now with 3 members from [NS] and 1 member from [BP].......Honored Combat for all and an Enjoyable time for all......For those who worry about it just agree not to use it....However, we who just played did not even talk about it....and everything was just fine. .....Now Go Kill Something....Those Hostiles are waiting.....hahahaha

[PingBosun]

Originally posted by MMaggio
Dear Nigel, I agree with you 100%.
"You load from the last good save and try again."
That's the whole point. We aren't talking about "dying" here. What we're trying to restrict is the apparent wanton use of the F7 key. Currently, by using F7, a player just respawns right back where he was with the same load out he had when he hit F7 the first time.
In single player who cares? But in MP, it allows the player to use all his weapons, then respawn with the same loadout as if he never used the weapons.
If everytime a player died and respawned in a hanger and had to start from there, there would be wails of complaints from the MP crowd.
However, you made an excellent point and I agree that the apparent vocal minority from the MP crowd should not dictate how you & others in SP play the game.
And, since we all know I am against "rules", I will no longer argue for it.
Keep the faith...

I agree, the F7 thing only raises its head in MP, and, as Kahless says, a few good hours of hunter/killer without the use of the F7. Maybe honour is the thing that is needed, rather than rules/conditions etc.

Still makes for a good discussion doesn't it!

[Wolfox]

I voted the first one, because I play games to have fun, not to be penalized for experimenting and... well... having fun. Also, keep in mind that if some penalty becomes mandatory, and there's even one player who doesn't want it, then the said player will be penalized twice - the penalty itself, and being forced to comply with a penalty he didn't want in the first place. I'd say it hurts more than it solves anything, so there's another reason I'm against it.

Also, if I wanted to be penalized, I'd look for combat in real life, not in a game.

As far as MP goes: fair play is way better than any forced punishment. Learning to have honor and self-imposing penalties if honor demands it is way more worth than having the said penalties forced unto you to "even the playfield".

Well, my 0.02 worth.

P.S.: I would *HATE* to die due to pressing F2 instead of F1 in front of an asteroid or something like that (I've done that quite a few times already) and being penalized for it. The shame is punishment enough.

[MMaggio]

I don't think there's a player out there who hasn't jumped into an asteroid or planet, or even another ship, at least twice!:P
Might I had that if you, "... wanted to be penalized, I'd look for combat in real life...", sounds pretty masochistic to me. You should consider other options for "penalties"!;)
Have fun...

[tha_rami]

Seeing it's 60%-40%, that means this idea can probably be tabled for now.

I'd still love to see an option like this, though.

[CS-ACI-]

Hello,

I have only ever used the F7 by accident, think I should remove the keybinding, how about removing this option all together?

It then free's the key up for a more productive use.

Can anyone think of a senario where you really need to self destruct?

If you get into a situation where you need to reload the last save game, then why not just quit and reload?

So my thought is get rid of the function, use the key for something else.

Oh, and if has to stay, I would use 2,3 and 4 so people do not rely on it.

Steve

[tha_rami]

That's a possibility too.

Heh, gotta love how this pretty much splits the camp ins two.

[verbosity]

for me,

I'd say a small financial penalty (say 5%)
and possibly a time penalty in MP, with a notice stating that they have to wait though.
this would add an extra dimension to clan battles......

[Chikara]

I would agree with the self destruct making one loose your secondary weapons IF cloaking devices were an equipment item. I've said it before and I'll say it again.... It seems to me that most Klingons that use Cloaks need the F7 self destruct in order to rearm without having to interupt battle and take 10 minutes or so and go find a station that sells cloaking devices and get back to the battle. This would be a very serious detraction to the use of cloaks (IMHO).

Don't get me wrong... I don't use them. That doesn't mean I won't. I just don't know how to effectively and I like the reloading ecals too much. I just don't know that cloaks are all that usefull when you can just jump out of battle and then jump back in. And having to wait 60 seconds in order to fire on an enemy... well... from my experience trying to setup on KlingonKahless (when I first met him and he fired on me when I was going to watch the clan battle.. so I went and bought cloaks in SP mode and logged back in to try and fight back) it's hard to setup on someone and time it so that when the cloak wears off you are close and within range to pounce. Add to this that you have to go searching when you are out (if F7 is modded so you loose secondary weapons)... well... cloaks might as well be taken out of the game if that becomes the case.

I don't necessarily like Klingons. I've only been attacked by one of them once. But I think the MP game would be MUCH more boring without them (even if they only show up infrequently).

[49rTbird]

the cloak can be deactiveted at will, ask Vice.

[tha_rami]

I'd prefer cloaking to work a bit more like Excalibur too, anyway.

[verbosity]

Originally posted by tha_rami
I'd prefer cloaking to work a bit more like Excalibur too, anyway.

agreed, I'd preffer a cloaking device that cost 10 times as much to have repeated uses, possibly one that needed some sort of 'fuel' even....

[MMaggio]

Well, how about this;
What if you had to give up shield protection for cloaking? Say, permanent cloaking, but only primary shielding, you can't fire while cloaked, and there might be a way to be seen as a "shimmer" in space if the other player had a science officer and a scanner.
Now that might be cool.
Permanent cloaking should require a shield trade off. IMHO.

[Vice]

Lol, this is so off topic now, lets just close this and I'll open another about a new kind of cloaking device.