Settings I'd like for a perma. This is meant to be a server that encourages warfare between corps.
Building:
Cut build times for colony buildings by half.
Cut resource requirements to complete a building by half.
Biodomes start with 1000 followers.
No minimum tax during UN protection.
-The goal here is to achieve fast building but not necessarily easy building, same strategy is involved but less time.
Colony Maintenance:
Cut pollution to 1/3.
Cut the effectiveness of researching environment to 1/3.
Increase tax revenue by 25%.
-The goal here is to reduce the frequency a player has to revisit a planet without turning every planet into 0 pollution.
Weapons production:
Double the output of weapon factories.
Cut the resource requirement for producing hardware in the weapons factory by half.
Don't sell negotiator missiles at ports.
Increase harvesting rates for equipment and uranium on colonies that don't produce a lot of them.
-This goal here is to give incentive for invasion and war by increasing the weapon people have available.
Other settings:
No-Mod.
P5 galaxy type, normal sized.
6-8 person corp size.
Normal fuel regen.
2nd generation nukes. A year(ish) ago nukes were sped up to balance against flight mods, reverse that for this server.
Other ideas that I think should be done on every server:
-Increase the hardware bays on the ISC and Sethdar to 12 (this is Drifter101's idea)
-Cap the shield prices at ports to 50 (Mel'Kaven's idea)
-Balance the value of different planet types (volcs vs rockies etc). They should all be different but equal value. Volcanics, greenhouses, and deserts need better reproduction growth, better harvesting rates, or maybe more allowed research discoveries.
proposed settings for a new perma
Moderators: Moleman, Kwijibo, Luna
Re: proposed settings for a new perma
Increasing the amount of weapons that can be made wont make them. If you want fighting just require all colonies to have a weapons factory or military can't be increased past 15% or something. Making nukes and lasers easier to build just means people will keep less overall because they can always build more cheaply
Re: proposed settings for a new perma
duece wrote:Settings I'd like for a perma. This is meant to be a server that encourages warfare between corps.
Building:
Cut build times for colony buildings by half.
Cut resource requirements to complete a building by half.
Biodomes start with 1000 followers.
No minimum tax during UN protection.
-The goal here is to achieve fast building but not necessarily easy building, same strategy is involved but less time.
Colony Maintenance:
Cut pollution to 1/3.
Cut the effectiveness of researching environment to 1/3.
Increase tax revenue by 25%.
-The goal here is to reduce the frequency a player has to revisit a planet without turning every planet into 0 pollution.
Weapons production:
Double the output of weapon factories.
Cut the resource requirement for producing hardware in the weapons factory by half.
Don't sell negotiator missiles at ports.
Increase harvesting rates for equipment and uranium on colonies that don't produce a lot of them.
-This goal here is to give incentive for invasion and war by increasing the weapon people have available.
Other settings:
No-Mod.
P5 galaxy type, normal sized.
6-8 person corp size.
Normal fuel regen.
2nd generation nukes. A year(ish) ago nukes were sped up to balance against flight mods, reverse that for this server.
Other ideas that I think should be done on every server:
-Increase the hardware bays on the ISC and Sethdar to 12 (this is Drifter101's idea)
-Cap the shield prices at ports to 50 (Mel'Kaven's idea)
-Balance the value of different planet types (volcs vs rockies etc). They should all be different but equal value. Volcanics, greenhouses, and deserts need better reproduction growth, better harvesting rates, or maybe more allowed research discoveries.
If i may ...
Why would this encourage Warfare between Corps bud ?
Ok i get the " make Building easier and Faster " - also get the " Less time spent cleaning pollution " etc .
Warfare between Corps is created because of "Invading " and also " Hostilities" between members of the 2 Corps. - Surely the stuff mentioned above wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference as to whether that Server was going to be a " Warfare Server ".
Why don't you create the Server ( as youv'e mentioned ) let People Build on there for like a Month or 2 - then just go there an wind up and Invade the Top Corperation properly ? - surely this is no difference to what you are asking for.
Better still - get Toonces to generate a " Random Invade message" which says something like " Your Colony Eta Librae II was invaded and taken by Dread Pirate Krusty.Burger of Galactic Burger Corp !" - and colony passed to Galactic Burger Corp - even though they didnt actually invade it. ( this could only be done when Corp offline ). - This would incite Warfare for you LOL
TBH the only way to create a Hostile Server full of Warfare .... Is to create it yourself.
You could have 2 corps on a Server - one invading the hell out of the other ... Doesn't mean to say the corp being Invaded is gonna retaliate.
You want active Warfare on a Server - its simple mate ..
1) sort out Glitches
2) Tweak this game back to its best
3) Encourage everyone to play this " Server "
4) Get Player Population rising again
5) ... appear interested .. Champs finished 10 days ago - still no Final Rank Positions .. sorry but this is lacklustre and shameful. The Past 3 years its taken a couple of days maximum.
Re: proposed settings for a new perma
i cannot find the passion to play sge seriously anymore..i really would like to see something good happen soon...this server would be nice i would definatly play it for awhile.
Re: proposed settings for a new perma
Yeah, I'm not sure if this goes far enough. But invading a lot of colonies takes nukes and lasers, a lot of them. And the only people with enough are the ones who already have large empires. I want more production so a corp with a small empire can launch an offensive off of a small base. Also with a high rate of growth people can build more nukes with the colonies as they invaded them, so the defensive strategy of keeping your factories empty will be less effective. It takes away one of the barriers to launching a war.D-Tox1 wrote: If i may ...
Why would this encourage Warfare between Corps bud ?
The building stuff is to people build more, the more colonies that are built, the more there is to invade. I also wanted to do something to make invasion easier, like capping solar shots to 5-7, but i saw that toonces weakened solars so that might not be necessary. This might not be enough but I think it does encourage more war.
Re: proposed settings for a new perma
Again bud - i don't see the point cos this is already within Starport.
Within Warfare ( in real life or in Starport ) there's the element of one side having more Nukes / Weaponry than the other side - thats what makes winning so detrimental.
What i'm trying to say is you can have unlimited Nukes on a Server - still doesn't mean Corps will battle all the time.
To be honest - i don't believe swamping a Server with easy accessible Nukes will make any difference whatsoever - its not the Nuke Supply that determines the Physics of the Gameplay - its the Players within it.
In fact if truths known - i would've expected a normal Perma like we have now would accommodate what your asking for just as much.
Example :
Corp 1) has Unlimited Nuke Supply within Planet Factories - and is Top Corp with Followers etc.
Corp 2) Doesnt have as many Nukes, OR Followers - but their Corp is far more active than the Top Corp.
Corp 2 invades Corp 1 endlessly for weeks at a time, Corp 1 does nothing ... why ?
Because they aint as active and tbh play other servers also.
If Toonces wants a Server that is Attack/Invade based on regular basis then he needs too shut down every dead Perma currently accessible and Create just ONE PK Perma - hence forcing everybody that wants too play Starport onto it.
Problem is this can have an awful backlash - not everybody wants the same thing.
Within Warfare ( in real life or in Starport ) there's the element of one side having more Nukes / Weaponry than the other side - thats what makes winning so detrimental.
What i'm trying to say is you can have unlimited Nukes on a Server - still doesn't mean Corps will battle all the time.
To be honest - i don't believe swamping a Server with easy accessible Nukes will make any difference whatsoever - its not the Nuke Supply that determines the Physics of the Gameplay - its the Players within it.
In fact if truths known - i would've expected a normal Perma like we have now would accommodate what your asking for just as much.
Example :
Corp 1) has Unlimited Nuke Supply within Planet Factories - and is Top Corp with Followers etc.
Corp 2) Doesnt have as many Nukes, OR Followers - but their Corp is far more active than the Top Corp.
Corp 2 invades Corp 1 endlessly for weeks at a time, Corp 1 does nothing ... why ?
Because they aint as active and tbh play other servers also.
If Toonces wants a Server that is Attack/Invade based on regular basis then he needs too shut down every dead Perma currently accessible and Create just ONE PK Perma - hence forcing everybody that wants too play Starport onto it.
Problem is this can have an awful backlash - not everybody wants the same thing.
Re: proposed settings for a new perma
Having nukes doesn't make people fight a war, but not having nukes makes people not war. I understand what you're saying about the actual players mattering more, but part of it is just making war more profitable.
A big reason people used to go after each other so much was that it was profitable. If you were invading an empire you could potentially take 20-30 colonies a day until they were wiped. That was huge incentive to do this, you could grow an empire 10 times faster than from just building and the cost to engage in a war (fuel, credits, nukes, time) was reasonable. So as long as the potential benefit outweighs the cost, people will be likely to do it. In current starport it's not like that at all, the cost to invade is much higher, and the rewards are a lot less. If you address the game dynamics to make war more profitable, then there will be more war.
But you're absolutely right, you still need players who would engage and compete with each other. So my idea only addresses part of the problem (and in my opinion it doesn't go far enough), but I think that's better than nothing.
A big reason people used to go after each other so much was that it was profitable. If you were invading an empire you could potentially take 20-30 colonies a day until they were wiped. That was huge incentive to do this, you could grow an empire 10 times faster than from just building and the cost to engage in a war (fuel, credits, nukes, time) was reasonable. So as long as the potential benefit outweighs the cost, people will be likely to do it. In current starport it's not like that at all, the cost to invade is much higher, and the rewards are a lot less. If you address the game dynamics to make war more profitable, then there will be more war.
But you're absolutely right, you still need players who would engage and compete with each other. So my idea only addresses part of the problem (and in my opinion it doesn't go far enough), but I think that's better than nothing.
Re: proposed settings for a new perma
I would go in the complete opposite direction by limiting people to encourage small arms conflicts, like a constant blitz. That, I think, in a small galaxy, wold promote the most action.
Re: proposed settings for a new perma
Deuce some players define "Profit" by the population they own - and the Experience they gain from it.
Some Players define "Profit" by the amount they can invade and gain within a short period of time.
You say you'd like to encourage " war " and full scale battles between Corps on a daily basis on a new Perma - i can understand this and in a lot of ways think it'd be a great and fun thing... But dude thats how it USED to be ...
War isn't profitable within Starport - only thing you achieve if your'e lucky is 5 million followers and 365 million Experience.
And again if truths known you can achieve this by purely Building and NOT invading or fighting.
It doesn't matter what changes you make for a new Perma, it'll still require 2 guys or Corps to attack each other.
" Profit " as you call it within Starport - is measured by enjoyment mate - bring some enjoyment back for the Players and iv'e no doubt what your'e asking could be achieved ( over time ) - but again Toonces needs to listen to the Players that genuinely have Starport in their interests and bring back in what they're asking for.
Enjoyment = Player base boom = busy Permas = War and Fighting ( as it used too be like on Permaverse ). and ultimately more tokensales.
Look at what we have on Starport now ... various dead Permas that could be busy if the Playerbase was'nt so low.
It isn't profitable or clever having Servers which are dead, but then again it isn't profitable or clever listening to 3 players that buy tokens on a regular basis and giving them what they want .
Those 3 Players are irrelevant to Starport - its the majority that matters - buying Tokens or not buying Tokens.
Starports current Playerbase is purely down to not listening to the People that actually mattered too the game.
Far too many bad decisions were made - even down too token buying Double Domes .. then what happened ?
They made a mockery of what used to be a " precious " thing on Starport - now nobody's bothered about Double Domes - but it offended plenty of Players.
3 little words for the Toonces Administration.
Back To Basics
Some Players define "Profit" by the amount they can invade and gain within a short period of time.
You say you'd like to encourage " war " and full scale battles between Corps on a daily basis on a new Perma - i can understand this and in a lot of ways think it'd be a great and fun thing... But dude thats how it USED to be ...
War isn't profitable within Starport - only thing you achieve if your'e lucky is 5 million followers and 365 million Experience.
And again if truths known you can achieve this by purely Building and NOT invading or fighting.
It doesn't matter what changes you make for a new Perma, it'll still require 2 guys or Corps to attack each other.
" Profit " as you call it within Starport - is measured by enjoyment mate - bring some enjoyment back for the Players and iv'e no doubt what your'e asking could be achieved ( over time ) - but again Toonces needs to listen to the Players that genuinely have Starport in their interests and bring back in what they're asking for.
Enjoyment = Player base boom = busy Permas = War and Fighting ( as it used too be like on Permaverse ). and ultimately more tokensales.
Look at what we have on Starport now ... various dead Permas that could be busy if the Playerbase was'nt so low.
It isn't profitable or clever having Servers which are dead, but then again it isn't profitable or clever listening to 3 players that buy tokens on a regular basis and giving them what they want .
Those 3 Players are irrelevant to Starport - its the majority that matters - buying Tokens or not buying Tokens.
Starports current Playerbase is purely down to not listening to the People that actually mattered too the game.
Far too many bad decisions were made - even down too token buying Double Domes .. then what happened ?
They made a mockery of what used to be a " precious " thing on Starport - now nobody's bothered about Double Domes - but it offended plenty of Players.
3 little words for the Toonces Administration.
Back To Basics
Re: proposed settings for a new perma
What I mean when I say profit is building an empire (you can measure that by followers or number of colonies). It should be easier to gain planets through invasion than through building, and if that's the case then even if there are only two active corps on a perma there will be incentive for them to go after each other. And it's my hope that this type of a game will be more enjoyable and appealing to people and will eventually become more active. And that rise of activity will also improve the competition. Of course, it could just all fail, but I hope it doesn't.D-Tox1 wrote:Deuce some players define "Profit" by the population they own - and the Experience they gain from it.
Some Players define "Profit" by the amount they can invade and gain within a short period of time.
You say you'd like to encourage " war " and full scale battles between Corps on a daily basis on a new Perma - i can understand this and in a lot of ways think it'd be a great and fun thing... But dude thats how it USED to be ...
War isn't profitable within Starport - only thing you achieve if your'e lucky is 5 million followers and 365 million Experience.
And again if truths known you can achieve this by purely Building and NOT invading or fighting.
It doesn't matter what changes you make for a new Perma, it'll still require 2 guys or Corps to attack each other.
" Profit " as you call it within Starport - is measured by enjoyment mate - bring some enjoyment back for the Players and iv'e no doubt what your'e asking could be achieved ( over time ) - but again Toonces needs to listen to the Players that genuinely have Starport in their interests and bring back in what they're asking for.
Enjoyment = Player base boom = busy Permas = War and Fighting ( as it used too be like on Permaverse ). and ultimately more tokensales.
Look at what we have on Starport now ... various dead Permas that could be busy if the Playerbase was'nt so low.
It isn't profitable or clever having Servers which are dead, but then again it isn't profitable or clever listening to 3 players that buy tokens on a regular basis and giving them what they want .
Those 3 Players are irrelevant to Starport - its the majority that matters - buying Tokens or not buying Tokens.
Starports current Playerbase is purely down to not listening to the People that actually mattered too the game.
Far too many bad decisions were made - even down too token buying Double Domes .. then what happened ?
They made a mockery of what used to be a " precious " thing on Starport - now nobody's bothered about Double Domes - but it offended plenty of Players.
3 little words for the Toonces Administration.
Back To Basics
You're right when you say this is how it used to be, and that's my point. I'm trying to think of some settings for a server that replicates the best parts of the old starport. There are a lot of things in starport that could be improved, but I'm zoning in on one specific element. Right now building, and playing defensively is the best approach. Build nothing but strong layout rockies on a perma for a year and you're set forever (especially on no-mod). The only way war is even practical is if you're in a corp that's been around forever, otherwise you won't have the credits and weapons to do anything. It's not possible for someone to build for a month then start invading a top corp. So this problem is the first thing that has to be addressed in making a war server.
There's definitely more that can be done, but this is something specific.
Re: proposed settings for a new perma
what is a "normal" sized galaxy? P5 was HUGE, i definitely dont think it should be that big. GA i think is a reasonable size, i think it would be good to have a GA-sized server with (ok i didnt read most of them.. but i read the building stuff) those specifications. more building = more cols to invade. cols are also easier to find, which also means more invading. and with everyone getting smooshed together... there will just be more overall conflict.
i like it.
oh, and with the building time halved... i assume rushing cost will be halved too? rushing cost is based on completion time, so i feel it only makes sense. but i want to make certain, as im a rush builder.
edit: maybe im wrong, but i think you're a bit confused dtox. i dont think these changes are intended to START wars between people/corps. sge players are entirely capable of starting BBQ on their own. these changes just make the wars more lively. though possibly more frequent, if the server is a bit small. people run into each other more.. someone's happy with the nukes, someone loses an IG ship...
i like it.
oh, and with the building time halved... i assume rushing cost will be halved too? rushing cost is based on completion time, so i feel it only makes sense. but i want to make certain, as im a rush builder.
edit: maybe im wrong, but i think you're a bit confused dtox. i dont think these changes are intended to START wars between people/corps. sge players are entirely capable of starting BBQ on their own. these changes just make the wars more lively. though possibly more frequent, if the server is a bit small. people run into each other more.. someone's happy with the nukes, someone loses an IG ship...
Re: proposed settings for a new perma
I don't know the actual number of systems, but whatever is considered typical. And I just meant the p5 map type, same sort of layout.
I hadn't thought about the rushing thing, but yeah it makes most sense to half the cost as well.
I hadn't thought about the rushing thing, but yeah it makes most sense to half the cost as well.