User Name
Password

Go Back   Planetarion Forums > Planetarion Related Forums > Planetarion Suggestions

Closed Thread
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 17 Aug 2005, 16:36   #1
Monroe
Planetarion Forum Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,289
Monroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud of
[Declined] Bringing Back PDS

There was a post in here on another topic that got me thinking about a useful way to bring PDS back into the game. If PDS are brought back as another form of a structure it could add to the game. Since there is a limit of 150 total contructions you couldn't have huge PDS whores, so the really big players couldn't abuse it. If in addition structure killing ships targeted PDS before other structures, it would give you a way to protect your more valuable structures. I might also suggest that PDS fire after pods, but before structure killers. The real tricky question would be how would they target. Maybe they should target all, but fairly weakly, or maybe they just target structure killers. Or maybe their class targeting should be set dynamically. Maybe they have 7 settings, one for each class of attacker, and one for "shield" which forces them to be destroyed first. So if they shoot, they don't provide any special defense. The reason I suggest this and not 6 classes of PDS is that with a 150 structure limit you could never really get enough to be effective. Thoughts?
__________________
Romans 10:9-10

#strategy
Monroe is offline  
Unread 17 Aug 2005, 16:48   #2
Smudge
For Crowly <3
 
Smudge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Luton, England
Posts: 1,391
Smudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond repute
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

No, No, No and No once again.
PDS was like the Backstreet Boys - everyone thought at the time they were cool, now we look at them and laugh.
__________________
[14:53:26] * Keiz`afk has joined #support
[14:53:36] <Keiz`afk> THE SMUDGE CHEERLEADING TEAM HAS ARRIVED
Smudge is offline  
Unread 17 Aug 2005, 18:18   #3
Cannon_Fodder
Registered User
 
Cannon_Fodder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,174
Cannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Maybe new people should be limited to using the search function only?
__________________
If one person is in delusion, they're called insane.
If many people are in delusion, it's called a religion.
Cannon_Fodder is offline  
Unread 17 Aug 2005, 18:31   #4
Ginga
Reassuringly Expensive
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Redditch, UK
Posts: 76
Ginga is infamous around these partsGinga is infamous around these partsGinga is infamous around these partsGinga is infamous around these parts
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

I think PDS is a great new angle. IF its shit, then dont build it, but some of us would like the option of having PDS.
Ginga is offline  
Unread 17 Aug 2005, 18:36   #5
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

That's not good enough, because it's the newbies who we need to protect and look after who will build the PDS. It was taken out for a reason, you know.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline  
Unread 17 Aug 2005, 18:39   #6
Cannon_Fodder
Registered User
 
Cannon_Fodder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,174
Cannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldCannon_Fodder spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginga
I think PDS is a great new angle.
Oh dear....
__________________
If one person is in delusion, they're called insane.
If many people are in delusion, it's called a religion.
Cannon_Fodder is offline  
Unread 17 Aug 2005, 18:44   #7
Monroe
Planetarion Forum Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,289
Monroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud of
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
That's not good enough, because it's the newbies who we need to protect and look after who will build the PDS. It was taken out for a reason, you know.
I fully understand why PDS were removed from the game, and given the previous model for PDS I fully agree it was a good move.
As a structure rather then a ship however, it wouldn't be that damaging to new players. Actually they are the ones who are often bashed by structure killers from mean spirited experianced players. If someone is going to get hit by structure killers, then it doesn't matter whether PDS are in the game or not, they still get screwed. Allowing PDS would give new players at least some defense against getting bashed.
__________________
Romans 10:9-10

#strategy
Monroe is offline  
Unread 17 Aug 2005, 18:49   #8
bmwoody
Schmuck
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Over there
Posts: 30
bmwoody has a spectacular aura aboutbmwoody has a spectacular aura about
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Hey now, let's not be completely biased about this.

PDS hasn't been seriously considered since PaX began... I personally liked some aspects of it. It was nice for me (a small player) to be better at defending against (nightly) smaller attacks. However, the small players like myself who found it useful against small attacks were easily defeated by large fleets with better initiative than their PDS. And, of course, always seemed to be those gigantic PDS whores who built almost nothing BUT so they couldn't be hit without losing an entire fleet.

But like I said, things are different in PaX. The attacking system is stricter both in targetting and in value limits. PDS (if implemented as new structures) would, for one thing, give more incentive to buy structure-killers (which I find are nothing but a waste of value and a way of being cruel ). I also think smaller players would be happy to build something a little better at defending against those evuhl nighlty roidings. Like Monroe said, there would be major caps on the amount of PDS you could build, so there's no real way for it to get out of hand... I don't see why it's so ridiculous to everyone!

I do have to say it would be kinda useless to have PDS that fire at only structure-killers. It would be like an independent battle from the rest of the ships: struc-ships VS PDS. We don't need a second battlefront . I think PDS would only be useful if they could target roiders. The 'dynamic' idea is interesting. You could set your PDS to defend against a specific ship class. That way it would be like getting an extra boost in whatever you have to defend against in that particular situation--but, again, not TOO big of a boost.

I'm not a noob or anything, so don't start flaming me like that please . I'm just trying to be openminded about this idea.
__________________
Don't worry, be happy!
bmwoody is offline  
Unread 17 Aug 2005, 18:57   #9
MAdnRisKy
home wrecker
 
MAdnRisKy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The other side of the galaxy ;)
Posts: 1,041
MAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to behold
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

forcing people to kill more to gain roids is bad for small players. bad bad bad. for big players it does at least make for a slightly more dynamic game. but that is not a big enough benifit for losing x ammount of players every time they lose ships roids AND structures
__________________
May the Farce be with you...

#pr0nstars - a pimp is for life, not just for christmas
MAdnRisKy is offline  
Unread 17 Aug 2005, 19:06   #10
Monroe
Planetarion Forum Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,289
Monroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud ofMonroe has much to be proud of
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
forcing people to kill more to gain roids is bad for small players. bad bad bad. for big players it does at least make for a slightly more dynamic game. but that is not a big enough benifit for losing x ammount of players every time they lose ships roids AND structures
This is really at the heart of what I was trying to suggest. Perhaps I should have entitled this thread, "suggestions on keeping small players from getting struture bashed." This is what I am really interested in stoping. The PDS suggestion is one way struture bashing might be limitable. If PDS soak up the hits, and fire back at struture killers (sure there is a coding issue) I'm not sure it's such a bad thing. However those of you who pointed out that this game is about encouraging attacking have a point, PDS do slow down attacking generally. What I would prefer to see is a PDS that discourage the use of struture killers, that's really my main point with this thread, maybe that isn't possible (short of removing struct killers).
__________________
Romans 10:9-10

#strategy
Monroe is offline  
Unread 17 Aug 2005, 19:22   #11
Neferti
part time ghost
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Grimsby
Posts: 925
Neferti is a splendid one to beholdNeferti is a splendid one to beholdNeferti is a splendid one to beholdNeferti is a splendid one to beholdNeferti is a splendid one to beholdNeferti is a splendid one to beholdNeferti is a splendid one to beholdNeferti is a splendid one to behold
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Of course, we could just remove structure killers entirely. That would solve the problem of structure bashing.

Alternatively, there could be a seperate structure bash limit. The roiding limit is 40 per cent of your own value. How about setting the limit for killing structures much higher, say 60 or even 80 per cent. This would stop many newbies having people kill their structures just for the hell of it. If SK's are included in a fleet attacking a small planet, they will simply not fire.

On topic, having a pds that shoots at ships as normal would be a bad idea. Rather than discourage structure killing, surely it would encourage it?
__________________
Is this the real life?
Is this just fantasy?
Neferti is offline  
Unread 18 Aug 2005, 05:26   #12
Ultimate Newbie
Commodore
 
Ultimate Newbie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,176
Ultimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monroe
There was a post in here on another topic that got me thinking about a useful way to bring PDS back into the game.
PDS and Useful are usually oximorons. But for you benefit, i took the 15 seconds it took to do a forum search on this matter, and came up with this thread:

http://pirate.planetarion.com/showth...=PDS+Structure

There are *heaps* of other similar threads, but thankfully many of those threads are linked inside the above thread.

Please read them all before posting in here again.
Thx.
__________________
#Strategy ; #Support - Sovereign
--- --- ---
"The Cake is a Lie."
Ultimate Newbie is offline  
Unread 18 Aug 2005, 14:36   #13
Remy
Ex-Head Multihunter
 
Remy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: At home
Posts: 900
Remy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud of
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Why do i even bother reading PDS threads....
__________________
R02.0-R4.0: [noob]
R05.0: [Wrath]/[Fury]
R06.0: Quit after 1 week
R7-9: Had an account, but didnt play seriously
R09.5: []LCH[] Officer
R10.0: []LCH[] HC (Rank #9, #1 Gal)
R10.5-R18.0: []LCH[] HC Scanner!
R18.0-R33 : Multihunter, Head MH
R34-.. : [CT] HC
Remy is offline  
Unread 18 Aug 2005, 14:41   #14
noah02
The Original Terran
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Afghan atm
Posts: 1,633
noah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

http://pirate.planetarion.com/showthread.php?t=181768

The first and best anti SK using constructions as PDS thread oh and the most argumentive.
__________________
introduction-Gramma
The following is a list of problems found in various places throughout the manual and game. We love you Noah!

Written by Kloopy Wed Mar 16 22:06:43 2005

Retired just for a bit....

Proud to have been 1up, SiN, Wolfpack, Bluetuba and the leader of ARK.
noah02 is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 04:02   #15
Ultimate Newbie
Commodore
 
Ultimate Newbie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,176
Ultimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by noah02
oh and the most argumentive.
I strongly disagree.

.
__________________
#Strategy ; #Support - Sovereign
--- --- ---
"The Cake is a Lie."
Ultimate Newbie is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 06:24   #16
Alessio
deserves a medal
 
Alessio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,211
Alessio is a pillar of this Internet societyAlessio is a pillar of this Internet societyAlessio is a pillar of this Internet societyAlessio is a pillar of this Internet societyAlessio is a pillar of this Internet societyAlessio is a pillar of this Internet societyAlessio is a pillar of this Internet societyAlessio is a pillar of this Internet societyAlessio is a pillar of this Internet societyAlessio is a pillar of this Internet societyAlessio is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

PDS is just an annoyance for either side.. the attacker and the defender..

and a waste of valuable build time..
__________________
"I have with me two gods, Persuasion and Compulsion."

Last edited by Alessio; 19 Aug 2005 at 06:53.
Alessio is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 12:10   #17
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

I never thought much of PDS to be honest but I think bringing it back in this new form might be a good idea. Here's why:

You are allowed 150 structures, no more. You also have to spend time building each structure, one by one. For this reason you really have to put some thought into what you build. Stands to reason that people won't just build PDS willy nilly cos they also want structures that give them resources and distorters. I am sure that most of the bigger planets will not build PDS because they are too busy building distorters and finance centres. For this reason the claim that PDS will reduce bashing is valid.

I would also suggest that PDS shoots after Structure Killers, not before. Structure Killers will also target PDS before any other structure. So if less than 20% of your structures are PDS and somebody destroys 20% of your structures then your PDS will be destroyed without firing a shot.

The outcome of this will be that people who build PDS to discourage attackers are effectively encouraging attackers to use Structure Killers. That is the price you pay for building PDS.

There should also be only 1 PDS type that targets each ship class. So for example if you build a PDS that targets frigates you need to build another one that targets battleships. This will stop PDS from becoming too powerful.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 12:22   #18
MAdnRisKy
home wrecker
 
MAdnRisKy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The other side of the galaxy ;)
Posts: 1,041
MAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to behold
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

right hang on, let me see if I can make some sense of all of this.

you want anti SK pds right? not anti pod PDS or anti flak PDS but anti SK pds?

because we can have a discussion about the other two, but general rule is, if you make something which fires at something, and that second something happens to be pods, the attacker wants to kill the first something, even ifg it's after it's done it's dirty work, because well, you shoot at me i shoot at you! (and i make sure you don't shoot again). and you get into arguements about init, and firepower and targetting, but basically the same issue always comes out, the people that build PDS are the people at the bottom of the food chain and the people at the top, and it's bad for everyone when those guys do it. Its bad for those at the bottom, it makes them harder targets, which disrupts the food chain, and causes stagnation. Its also bad for them on a personal level because it results largely in people smashing through said PDS so they can get the roids later, and then the planet has no roids and no defence and is basically shafted.
It's bad for people at the very top to build them as it makes them inpenitrable. classic case would be Game in rnd 3.

so I think we could all agree 9if you think about it) that PDS to hit ships is a no no.

Now pds to hit sks. WHY??

for heavens sake. Jester made the best point about this i ever read. if you need pds to counter sks (specific structures designed to stop sks before sks level your constructs) then it suggests that sks are broken. because if you introduce them, and everyone would build them and they are an easy counter to sks, then they (the sks) become obsolete. for christs sake if the objective is to stop people getting their structures blown up, then simply remove the option to blow them up!

static defences in an attacking fluid gaming style, such as pax (rather than PA) is a completely misleading and bogus idea, which is why we have this problem btw, as in essences structures already fall into this category....
__________________
May the Farce be with you...

#pr0nstars - a pimp is for life, not just for christmas
MAdnRisKy is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 12:31   #19
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
because we can have a discussion about the other two, but general rule is, if you make something which fires at something, and that second something happens to be pods, the attacker wants to kill the first something, even ifg it's after it's done it's dirty work, because well, you shoot at me i shoot at you! (and i make sure you don't shoot again). and you get into arguements about init, and firepower and targetting, but basically the same issue always comes out, the people that build PDS are the people at the bottom of the food chain and the people at the top, and it's bad for everyone when those guys do it. Its bad for those at the bottom, it makes them harder targets, which disrupts the food chain, and causes stagnation. Its also bad for them on a personal level because it results largely in people smashing through said PDS so they can get the roids later, and then the planet has no roids and no defence and is basically shafted.
It's bad for people at the very top to build them as it makes them inpenitrable. classic case would be Game in rnd 3.

so I think we could all agree 9if you think about it) that PDS to hit ships is a no no.
I think one of the best arguments in favour of this idea is that it will discourage stagnation.

Like I said you are allowed 150 structures, no more. For this reason everybody is capable of building as much PDS as each other, doesn't matter how many roids you have, the limit is still 150.
This will make larger planets comparatively easier to attack because their PDS does comparatively less damage. Not to mention the fact that they won't even build any PDS in the first place.
It will also discourage attacks on small planets in small galaxies because if you build 146 PDS structures you can probably make yourself effectively immune to attack if you have a small number of roids. Of course the trick for the game designers is to tailor the damage PDS does so that it only makes you immune up to a point. I don't see a problem with a PDS whore being immune to attack if he has 200 or even 300 roids but I do see a problem if he is immune when he has significantly more roids.
This will encourage people to attack bigger targets, will allow the small planets to become roid fat (by which point they will be roided) and will make for a more dynamic game than what we have now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
Now pds to hit sks. WHY??

for heavens sake. Jester made the best point about this i ever read. if you need pds to counter sks (specific structures designed to stop sks before sks level your constructs) then it suggests that sks are broken. because if you introduce them, and everyone would build them and they are an easy counter to sks, then they (the sks) become obsolete. for christs sake if the objective is to stop people getting their structures blown up, then simply remove the option to blow them up!

static defences in an attacking fluid gaming style, such as pax (rather than PA) is a completely misleading and bogus idea, which is why we have this problem btw, as in essences structures already fall into this category....
I personally like the idea of PDS that only targets SK's, I have discussed it at great length in another thread. Unfortunately though Appocomaster pretty much blew the idea out of the water by saying that the current combat engine will not allow this idea to be implemented. No point discussing it further.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 12:55   #20
MAdnRisKy
home wrecker
 
MAdnRisKy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The other side of the galaxy ;)
Posts: 1,041
MAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to behold
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

you didn't listen to a word i said

look ok, you've had an idea about something, and designed something. great!, seriously, it's good you're inovative. But one of the important tasks when trying to be creative, is to make sure you are chanelling your energy in a fashion which will produce a useful outcome. that's forsight and planning for you

now look, if you make PDS (and oh dear god it sounds like you wanted it to fire at roiding fleets here) as pasrt of the structures, then ok yeah top players won't use it, they'd rather have amps or distorters or finance, whatever. but that isn't really the issue, it's just an add on concern. The main concern with PDS is the small players building it. If the PDS is in any way better than a standard ship, (and lets face it it'd have to be for people to build it)and is doing dmg to roiding fleets, then yeah, in the short term, the planet that has a lot of it may get avoided. but all it will do, is encourage, yes... encourage people to build more SKS so that they can get the roids cheaper or say, send a kill fleet then a roid fleet or 2 fleets or 3 all of which designed to kill the PDS (at 20%) levels, which i thought was the exact opposite of the intentions behind all of this.

Also, and i hate to say this, but small players, need regular incomming to feed the game.

there's no nice way of saying it, but it's these guys that bring in new rocks to the universe through initation. make it impossible to hit them, and it's game over :/
__________________
May the Farce be with you...

#pr0nstars - a pimp is for life, not just for christmas
MAdnRisKy is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 13:41   #21
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
you didn't listen to a word i said

look ok, you've had an idea about something, and designed something. great!, seriously, it's good you're inovative. But one of the important tasks when trying to be creative, is to make sure you are chanelling your energy in a fashion which will produce a useful outcome. that's forsight and planning for you
I listened to every single letter of every single word and I responded accordingly. You on the other hand completely ignored the fact that I effectively destroyed all the points you were making and continued to accuse me of being unable to think through my ideas.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
now look, if you make PDS (and oh dear god it sounds like you wanted it to fire at roiding fleets here) as pasrt of the structures, then ok yeah top players won't use it, they'd rather have amps or distorters or finance, whatever. but that isn't really the issue, it's just an add on concern. The main concern with PDS is the small players building it. If the PDS is in any way better than a standard ship, (and lets face it it'd have to be for people to build it)and is doing dmg to roiding fleets, then yeah, in the short term, the planet that has a lot of it may get avoided. but all it will do, is encourage, yes... encourage people to build more SKS so that they can get the roids cheaper or say, send a kill fleet then a roid fleet or 2 fleets or 3 all of which designed to kill the PDS (at 20%) levels, which i thought was the exact opposite of the intentions behind all of this.
So what? You build PDS you have to be willing to take the consequences. There are consequences to anything you do in this game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
Also, and i hate to say this, but small players, need regular incomming to feed the game.

there's no nice way of saying it, but it's these guys that bring in new rocks to the universe through initation. make it impossible to hit them, and it's game over :/
Consider this simple fact:

Free planets cannot build more than 20 structures.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 13:51   #22
Smudge
For Crowly <3
 
Smudge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Luton, England
Posts: 1,391
Smudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond reputeSmudge has a reputation beyond repute
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

by the way, PDS stands for Pretty Damn Shit
__________________
[14:53:26] * Keiz`afk has joined #support
[14:53:36] <Keiz`afk> THE SMUDGE CHEERLEADING TEAM HAS ARRIVED
Smudge is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 13:59   #23
MAdnRisKy
home wrecker
 
MAdnRisKy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The other side of the galaxy ;)
Posts: 1,041
MAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to behold
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

sigh you either get it or you don't.

sorry..... I tried :/
__________________
May the Farce be with you...

#pr0nstars - a pimp is for life, not just for christmas
MAdnRisKy is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 14:04   #24
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
sigh you either get it or you don't.

sorry..... I tried :/
Why is it always the idiots on these forums that try to criticise me? If you deem yourself worthy to criticise me then prove me worthy of your criticism. If you cannot then you are nothing but a fool.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 14:32   #25
MAdnRisKy
home wrecker
 
MAdnRisKy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The other side of the galaxy ;)
Posts: 1,041
MAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to behold
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker
Why is it always the idiots on these forums that try to criticise me? If you deem yourself worthy to criticise me then prove me worthy of your criticism. If you cannot then you are nothing but a fool.
now look fella, i've tried to explain it to you.

we have quite a few threads suggesting ideas which are aimed at doing away with SKs be it through pds, through suiciding the ships, through nuking their stats, whatever.

the concept that you can destroy not just the resources, but the time taken to put up the structures, is one which could be argued to be flawed. (and indeed has been, over and over again).

what you are proposing, is escalating that arms race. you are encouraging the use of SKS. this, is, BAD. mkay?

you are also encouraging people to think in a back footed fashion by building defensive aiding structures over aggressive ones, now i don't know you from adam, but i'd hope that you've grasped that the newish (we've been at it for 5 rounds now) model of PA is not about defending.

and the point about the free planets only getting to build 20 structs ..... so we still make it that the absolute bottom of the food pile , is harder to roid?

brilliant, absolutely brilliant! because it doesn't matter that they can build only so much, they can build some anyway, and these are the guys which should be providing the roids for others. Now that is a harsh reality, and perhaps the mechanics for introducing new roids in the game need changing, but currently this is what we have, and you are proposing that in order for people to use this source, they have to kill more and only increase the disheartenment not aleviate it.

I'm sorry i've exhausted my patience now, i'm not going to continue this discussion further, if you still wish to champion your cause inspite of my opinions, then great, bully for you, lets see if someone else can try to reason with you instead. (before kal comes in and says "declined PDS" because he like everyone else has looked at this issue over and over again, and the same conclusions have been drawn every time)
__________________
May the Farce be with you...

#pr0nstars - a pimp is for life, not just for christmas
MAdnRisKy is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 14:54   #26
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Well, it seems I provoked you into making a productive post. Lucky me. I know you say you won't respond to my post but maybe somebody else will.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
now look fella, i've tried to explain it to you.

we have quite a few threads suggesting ideas which are aimed at doing away with SKs be it through pds, through suiciding the ships, through nuking their stats, whatever.

the concept that you can destroy not just the resources, but the time taken to put up the structures, is one which could be argued to be flawed. (and indeed has been, over and over again).

what you are proposing, is escalating that arms race. you are encouraging the use of SKS. this, is, BAD. mkay?
I personally think we should get rid of Structure Killers but seeing as PA Team seem unwilling to do this even after all the moaning I prefer to channel my energy into trying to make Structure Killers at least a little bit useful.
You are right that this will make SK's a little more useful, only against planets with PDS though. If you don't want to be targetted by an SK bitch then don't be a PDS bitch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
you are also encouraging people to think in a back footed fashion by building defensive aiding structures over aggressive ones, now i don't know you from adam, but i'd hope that you've grasped that the newish (we've been at it for 5 rounds now) model of PA is not about defending.
PDS will affect a limited number of people. Those paid accounts that are in not so active galaxies that feel that they have no choice but to become PDS whores. They won't be able to win the round since they will still get incoming when they are roid fat but they will be able to do better than now that they do not have that option. This should also help to increase the score of lower ranking galaxies since they will be better equipped to hold onto their roids. This can only be a good thing.

You say that the game isn't about defending, it's not. It shouldn't be about being in a galaxy where your incoming never gets reported and you end up getting more than your fair share of hostile waves on you simply because you happen to be in a low scoring galaxy either.

[quote=MAdnRisKy]and the point about the free planets only getting to build 20 structs ..... so we make it that the absolute bottom of the food pile, is harder to roid?

brilliant, absolutely brilliant![quote=MAdnRisKy]

Kal has already stated that he wishes to make the spread of paid and free planets more even next round. This means that all free planets should have at least a few paid planets in their galaxy. If their galaxy happens to be low scoring it's likely that the paid planets will become PDS whores. This will benefit the free planets because less incoming on the paid planets means that the paid planets are better equipped to defend the free planets.
Like I've said before though there will not be that much increased heat on the free planets seeing as there won't be that many PDS whores anyway. And any that there are will become big and get themselves roided anyway.

[quote=MAdnRisKy]kal comes in and says "declined PDS" because he like everyone else has looked at this issue over and over again, and the same conclusions have been drawn every time[quote=MAdnRisKy]

Maybe he will maybe he won't. Doesn't change what I'm trying to do here though.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 15:31   #27
MAdnRisKy
home wrecker
 
MAdnRisKy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The other side of the galaxy ;)
Posts: 1,041
MAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to behold
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

ok I don't believe it. I need to pull it apart line by line for you?

I have better things to do fs!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubby
I personally think we should get rid of Structure Killers but seeing as PA Team seem unwilling to do this even after all the moaning I prefer to channel my energy into trying to make Structure Killers at least a little bit useful.
You are right that this will make SK's a little more useful, only against planets with PDS though. If you don't want to be targetted by an SK bitch then don't be a PDS bitch.
you don't like them you want them out, yet you want to make them useful? ok....

look let me explain this, if people build something they'll use it. I don't for instance, as a xan, when attacking an fi target, avoid sending some of my fi at it, (unless i am huge, and we're talking average players here, since we're trying to establish what the average trend of sk use will be) I send it all. Why? I only have 3 slots, I don't want to leave ships at base, and have them caught, plus you never know when adding in pulsars say to attack a zik will come in useful. Now if sks are fi, i'm going to include them in my attack fleet, since because as a general rule if i;m active i'll get incs every night or every other night, and i don't want them to die needlessly at home.

see what the pds has done? it's made more people build more sks, and thus more people attack with sks, and thus more people get stuff blown up, that is hard to replace, and cannot be fled.

NOT GOOD!

and this is even if i don't have PDS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubby
PDS will affect a limited number of people. Those paid accounts that are in not so active galaxies that feel that they have no choice but to become PDS whores. They won't be able to win the round since they will still get incoming when they are roid fat but they will be able to do better than now that they do not have that option. This should also help to increase the score of lower ranking galaxies since they will be better equipped to hold onto their roids. This can only be a good thing.
no actually it can be a bad thing. firstly, it's not going to only affect a few, see above, secondly see further above for how messing with the food chain without providing counter balance, is a bad thing.

encouraging people to become PDS whores, is not smart. if all you have is PDS to your name, and i smash it, you're more likely to want to quit. BAD. If they get too many roids, they risk incomming, so what do they do? they keep a low roid count, barely dare attack, don't init roids, and turtle. BAD where is the food chain, where is the fun, people get bored of doing this. and how can you "win", not by coming top, but by achieving something. what you decide that if you don't get incs for a week you're doing well? thats a negative goals, negative goals are bad for increasing moral, they can only fail. bad moral = dwindling player base. Come on, you're smarter than this, figure this kind of thing out!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubby
You say that the game isn't about defending, it's not. It shouldn't be about being in a galaxy where your incoming never gets reported and you end up getting more than your fair share of hostile waves on you simply because you happen to be in a low scoring galaxy either.
sure we agree getting more than your fair share of incs is bad and discouraging. if the problem rests in the galaxy set up, fix the galaxy set up. don't screw up the food chain. if the problem is the food chain, fix the food chain, don't screw up the bottle neck of planet growth (ie time). if the problem is the bottle neck...... (see where i'm going with this?)

for any change there are consequences, if the consequences are worse, and through circular impacts come right back round to making the initial problem worse, then your solution is not a solution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chubby
Kal has already stated that he wishes to make the spread of paid and free planets more even next round. This means that all free planets should have at least a few paid planets in their galaxy. If their galaxy happens to be low scoring it's likely that the paid planets will become PDS whores. This will benefit the free planets because less incoming on the paid planets means that the paid planets are better equipped to defend the free planets.
Like I've said before though there will not be that much increased heat on the free planets seeing as there won't be that many PDS whores anyway. And any that there are will become big and get themselves roided anyway.
good at least one person is addressing the problem at the source.

free planets will suffer. not sure why yet? watch:

more sks around, free planets get targetted, they lose ships roids and structures, instead of just ships and roids.
gal mates thinking defensively and building PDS, mean they don't need to be so active, just log in start next construct go afk, because if they're constantly attacking they're gaining in size, they get incs, they lose PDS. so they stay low, so they're not online to send the def to the freebies.

they encourage freebies not in how to play the game with any positive goals, but how to turtle. freebie gets bored, doesn't pay for account (who would) PA loses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubby
Maybe he will maybe he won't. Doesn't change what I'm trying to do here though
remind me, what is it you're trying to do here again? besides make me lose my hair...
__________________
May the Farce be with you...

#pr0nstars - a pimp is for life, not just for christmas
MAdnRisKy is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 15:57   #28
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
ok I don't believe it. I need to pull it apart line by line for you?

I have better things to do fs!
You told me that you would not reply to any further posts that I made. I then accepted this fact and as a consequence expressed my hope that somebody other than you would enter this thread and consider my ideas. You then proceed to tell me that you have better things to do than reply to my posts and then reply to my post in great detail. Just like you I do not have better things to do so I will now go on to reply to your post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
you don't like them you want them out, yet you want to make them useful? ok....

look let me explain this, if people build something they'll use it. I don't for instance, as a xan, when attacking an fi target, avoid sending some of my fi at it, (unless i am huge, and we're talking average players here, since we're trying to establish what the average trend of sk use will be) I send it all. Why? I only have 3 slots, I don't want to leave ships at base, and have them caught, plus you never know when adding in pulsars say to attack a zik will come in useful. Now if sks are fi, i'm going to include them in my attack fleet, since because as a general rule if i;m active i'll get incs every night or every other night, and i don't want them to die needlessly at home.

see what the pds has done? it's made more people build more sks, and thus more people attack with sks, and thus more people get stuff blown up, that is hard to replace, and cannot be fled.

NOT GOOD!

and this is even if i don't have PDS.
I have addressed this in another thread. I suggested that Structure Killers be made a different class to that race's pods. So for example a Xan who wanted to send SK's would have to send a FR/DE fleet rather than a DE fleet. Do you see what I'm doing? I am trying to make the use of SK's tactical rather than the uselesness that they are now. Changes like this should make SK's be used for the intended purpose, not what they're used for now.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
no actually it can be a bad thing. firstly, it's not going to only affect a few, see above, secondly see further above for how messing with the food chain without providing counter balance, is a bad thing.

encouraging people to become PDS whores, is not smart. if all you have is PDS to your name, and i smash it, you're more likely to want to quit. BAD. If they get too many roids, they risk incomming, so what do they do? they keep a low roid count, barely dare attack, don't init roids, and turtle. BAD where is the food chain, where is the fun, people get bored of doing this. and how can you "win", not by coming top, but by achieving something. what you decide that if you don't get incs for a week you're doing well? thats a negative goals, negative goals are bad for increasing moral, they can only fail. bad moral = dwindling player base. Come on, you're smarter than this, figure this kind of thing out!
Smashing a PDS whore is hard because each wave can only destroy 20% of their structures.
PDS whores do risk incoming if they become roid fat but people risk incoming now if they get roids yet they still do it.
I could claim that you are smart enough to figure this out for yourself but I won't demean myself into making such a crass remark.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
sure we agree getting more than your fair share of incs is bad and discouraging. if the problem rests in the galaxy set up, fix the galaxy set up. don't screw up the food chain. if the problem is the food chain, fix the food chain, don't screw up the bottle neck of planet growth (ie time). if the problem is the bottle neck...... (see where i'm going with this?)

for any change there are consequences, if the consequences are worse, and through circular impacts come right back round to making the initial problem worse, then your solution is not a solution.
Correct me if I'm wrong but you seem to think the lower ranking galaxies initiating roids for the higher ranking galaxies to steal is a good thing. Why is this a good thing? Surely what promotes stagnation is having the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
good at least one person is addressing the problem at the source.

free planets will suffer. not sure why yet? watch:

more sks around, free planets get targetted, they lose ships roids and structures, instead of just ships and roids.
gal mates thinking defensively and building PDS, mean they don't need to be so active, just log in start next construct go afk, because if they're constantly attacking they're gaining in size, they get incs, they lose PDS. so they stay low, so they're not online to send the def to the freebies.

they encourage freebies not in how to play the game with any positive goals, but how to turtle. freebie gets bored, doesn't pay for account (who would) PA loses.
I agree that the galaxy system needs to be improved. I have commented on all of Kal's ideas on how to improve the galaxy system and came up with ideas of my own. The two of us were basically ignored. I know for a fact that you did not comment on his ideas. Who's not addressing the problem here?

As for your speculation on what will happen if PDS is introduced I think you are wrong. Lower ranking galaxies will find it easier to hold onto their roids but there will come a time when they have too many roids and somebody steals them. The only effect PDS will have is allow small galaxies to grow bigger up to a certain point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
remind me, what is it you're trying to do here again? besides make me lose my hair...
I am trying to provoke you into having an intelligent discussion. I succeeded. I am glad.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 16:25   #29
MAdnRisKy
home wrecker
 
MAdnRisKy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The other side of the galaxy ;)
Posts: 1,041
MAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to behold
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

no see, what i'm trying to do is to get you to appreciate new sides of the discussion. I'm failing.

firstly, I seem to have failed to explain what i mean by a food chain. PA is a pyramid construction, now I have previously (and we're talking like 8 or so rounds ago now) suggested that this isn't such a smart move, but that's what we have. any attempts to constrain that without actually fundamentally reworking the system, is just pissing on a house fire. :/

tiny gals init, small gals raid tiny gals, medium gals raid small gals, big gals raid medium gals, massive gals raid big gals. ok? I mean we all know that.... what happens when you disrupt this, is that people run out of targets that they can hit easily. so they overkill targets. and overkill is bad. Now you say that it's hard to nuke PDS if you can only kill 20%. well if that was the case then you wouldn't be saying that SKs in general are a bad idea, but you do.... you can't have it both ways.

now sure, changing the class on SKS from the roiders, is good, and good thinking! but how is that relevent to pds? it's not. you could do that, gain an improvement, and not put in pds. see what i mean about addressing the actual problems? and using foresight? you are getting that at least, progress....

you also neglect to mention what happens when someone comes along when the target gets too fat (after hiding behind the PDS) assuming he ever does get too fat of course, you didn't seem to answer the other point :/
see because when he gets incs, he isn't going to get one wave. he's going to get 5 maybe 10 or 15. because everyone else who is small and in an easier to hit gal is turtling, so you grab what you can. and they all bring sks. now our lowbie has 15 waves of incs, which will surely cripple his structures (they all brought sks you see, hoping to be able to come again and because if they have to pay for the roids, he is going to have to pay for hurting their ships) and the end result is no ships (he didn't build too many in the first place, but those he did built have since been caught) no roids and no structures. so once again that's no income, no means of getting an income, and no means of protecting it, or gaining intel to gain new income, and a further reduction in income, and any means to build ships to give defence, gain new income and so on. HOW IS THAT GOOD? HOW IS THAT PROTECTING A LOWBIE?

*sigh*

and what promotes stagnation, is the removal of targets. provided everyone can hit everyone else, in this engine, the game keeps on ticking. if you drive up the average cost per roid people will stop attacking harder targets and attack smaller ones to keep the cost down, this becomes a vicious circle with the smaller, but somewhat active players, getting more incs because the food chain is distorted.

go and read up on pyramid eco systems and you'll see what i mean. (actually do this, don't just read over this and ignore it, understanding the critical game mechanics is cruicial for offering helpful suggestions in the future).


oh and, please, don't say i don't contribute, I really hate it when people accuse me of that fortunately I don't feel the need to give my CV of actual hard and fast contributions to PA over the rounds just to rebuke that line, but for the record, stop making this personal ok and stop taking it as a personal attack every time i point out why something you've suggested won't work, or will be counter productive. it's not you I think is wrong it's your suggestions, although I will admit to becoming more frustrated with your inability to actually address what's in front of you.

oh and we were having an inteligent discussion before actually, well i was, you were banding around insults :/
__________________
May the Farce be with you...

#pr0nstars - a pimp is for life, not just for christmas
MAdnRisKy is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 16:59   #30
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
firstly, I seem to have failed to explain what i mean by a food chain. PA is a pyramid construction, now I have previously (and we're talking like 8 or so rounds ago now) suggested that this isn't such a smart move, but that's what we have. any attempts to constrain that without actually fundamentally reworking the system, is just pissing on a house fire. :/
Seeing as you don't seem to want to fundamentally rework the system I fail to see why you are saying that the system is fundamentally flawed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
tiny gals init, small gals raid tiny gals, medium gals raid small gals, big gals raid medium gals, massive gals raid big gals. ok? I mean we all know that.... what happens when you disrupt this, is that people run out of targets that they can hit easily. so they overkill targets. and overkill is bad. Now you say that it's hard to nuke PDS if you can only kill 20%. well if that was the case then you wouldn't be saying that SKs in general are a bad idea, but you do.... you can't have it both ways.
I say that you can only destroy 20% of somebody's structures and you take that to mean that I think that SK's are a good idea. I fail to see your point. Should I have said that it would be nice if you can destroy 100% of somebody's structures in one hit?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
now sure, changing the class on SKS from the roiders, is good, and good thinking! but how is that relevent to pds? it's not. you could do that, gain an improvement, and not put in pds. see what i mean about addressing the actual problems? and using foresight? you are getting that at least, progress....
I did not bring up SKs. You did. You droned on and on about how terrible SK's would be if this idea were implemented. I then told you a piece of information that was relevant to the topic yet happened to have something to do with SK's. See the difference?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
you also neglect to mention what happens when someone comes along when the target gets too fat (after hiding behind the PDS) assuming he ever does get too fat of course, you didn't seem to answer the other point :/
see because when he gets incs, he isn't going to get one wave. he's going to get 5 maybe 10 or 15. because everyone else who is small and in an easier to hit gal is turtling, so you grab what you can. and they all bring sks. now our lowbie has 15 waves of incs, which will surely cripple his structures (they all brought sks you see, hoping to be able to come again and because if they have to pay for the roids, he is going to have to pay for hurting their ships) and the end result is no ships (he didn't build too many in the first place, but those he did built have since been caught) no roids and no structures. so once again that's no income, no means of getting an income, and no means of protecting it, or gaining intel to gain new income, and a further reduction in income, and any means to build ships to give defence, gain new income and so on. HOW IS THAT GOOD? HOW IS THAT PROTECTING A LOWBIE?
You may well be right but it would have been nice if you had mentioned this earlier. And do not give me any shit about how it should have figured this out for myself seeing as I have had to explain a lot of the basics to you in great detail.
Looking at your scenario I would say that PDS would really only be viable for small paid planets that don't want more than a couple hundred roids and are happy to defend their alliance and galaxy for the rest of the round. I see this as a viable new way to play the game. You evidently do not. I think we will have to agree to disagree here since neither of us is going to change our mind. You see discussions like this are about getting ideas out there, not about beating them into people until they just give up and accept what you say so that you'll just shut up about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
go and read up on pyramid eco systems and you'll see what i mean. (actually do this, don't just read over this and ignore it, understanding the critical game mechanics is cruicial for offering helpful suggestions in the future).
I suggest you do not tell me what to do and keep your opinions about what may or not be worth doing to yourself. I could suggest that you go and post in the relevant thread about galaxy systems because it is crucial for your understanding of the game mechanics. It would be a lot less time consuming and a lot more productive than the bollocks you're telling me to read.

I'm not going to do that though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
oh and, please, don't say i don't contribute, I really hate it when people accuse me of that fortunately I don't feel the need to give my CV of actual hard and fast contributions to PA over the rounds just to rebuke that line,
I did not ask for a long and boring list of what you may or not have done for the game. I do not want to read it and I sincerely hope that you do not mention it again. What I did was accuse you of not contributing anything in one particular thread. Nothing more. Nothing less.
That accusation cannot be rebuked.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
but for the record, stop making this personal ok and stop taking it as a personal attack every time i point out why something you've suggested won't work, or will be counter productive. it's not you I think is wrong it's your suggestions, although I will admit to becoming more frustrated with your inability to actually address what's in front of you.

oh and we were having an inteligent discussion before actually, well i was, you were banding around insults :/
Every time you attack me I attack you, simple as that. I added my points to this thread and you accused me of not knowing how to formulate an argument. You then proceeded to add insult to injury by not backing up your false claims. When I called you up on it you still refused to back up what you were saying. Luckily you then went on from there to add something useful to the discussion. Stop harping on about your past misdeeds.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 17:11   #31
MAdnRisKy
home wrecker
 
MAdnRisKy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The other side of the galaxy ;)
Posts: 1,041
MAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to behold
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

dude, you're like, obnoxious and shit.

sad
__________________
May the Farce be with you...

#pr0nstars - a pimp is for life, not just for christmas
MAdnRisKy is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 17:13   #32
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
dude, you're like, obnoxious and shit.

sad
I'm glad you've decided not to contribute any more since you have nothing else left to contribute.

Like I said I don't think your ideas are irrelevant, it's just that we have them now and if you say anything else you'll just be rehashing.

EDIT:

I'd like to retract the above statement because something that somebody told me in a rep they gave me for it made me realise that while what I was trying to say (that I think you did in fact contribute positively to this thread) is correct I said it an unnecessarily harsh way. I apologise Risky, I shouldn't have said it.

What I will say though which I do not think is an unfair comment is that in every single post you directed at me you tried to patronise me. You may not have done it intentionally but it's what you did. All I did was patronise you back. If you think that makes me obnoxious then I think you're wrong. I was only trying to show you that patronising someone is not the right way to go about disagreeing with them.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.

Last edited by ChubbyChecker; 19 Aug 2005 at 18:01.
ChubbyChecker is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 17:26   #33
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

What about ships that nukes your own roids to kill more enemyships. that would be fun
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 17:31   #34
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

In Planetarion, everything is in balance with each other. Every aspect of the game is inter-related with five other parts of the game, and changing one changes the relationship for all of those five, not just the one you are changing.

As I explained in Behe's ministers thread, there's a constant knock-on effect whenever you change a feature. In that case, making a galaxy need three ministers to exile a planet instead of one meant that unpaid planets needed be ministers, otherwise a small galaxy would never be able to exile someone (making their situation worse due to inactives - a vicious circle).

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker
I did not bring up SKs. You did. You droned on and on about how terrible SK's would be if this idea were implemented. I then told you a piece of information that was relevant to the topic yet happened to have something to do with SK's. See the difference?
Yet it is perfectly valid to bring up SKs, since they are directly related to structures. At the moment, players do not need to send structure killers in order to roid with no losses. If you create PDS as structures, then you do. At the moment, most players haven't built structure killers. Under your plan they would, in order to hit PDS whores.

I started playing in Round 3. I initiated 300 roids straight off, and built 200 laser turrets and 90 EMP turrets to defend myself. Within three days, they were dead. Thankfully an experienced player took me aside in the IRC channel and explained that if I wanted to do well, I should never build PDS. It hasn't always stopped me - PDS was good in one of the early p2p rounds - but I took his lesson to heart. PDS is shit unless it really really isn't. Make any sense?

For the PDS structures not to be shit, they need a lot of armour and a lot of power. They also need to shoot before structure killers. End result? Stagnation, as players find themselves unable to take reasonable losses when landing on PDS whores.

Let's say that they can land on these PDS whores. They will attack with SKs, I assume this is a given? Well, factories are structures too, and I expect a fair few of those to go BOOM! This means that the newbie can't build ships which makes it even harder for him to defend himself in the future. This is bad. PDS is bad. It leadth to the dark side.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 17:32   #35
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
What about ships that nukes your own roids to kill more enemyships. that would be fun
It's shit, unless you can actually expain it in a non-shit way. I'd rather have holoroids back. Either way, a new thread for it please.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 17:32   #36
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
What about ships that nukes your own roids to kill more enemyships. that would be fun
hehe

I think that would be a bad idea to be honest because it would reduce the number of roids in the Universe. Never a good idea.

Off topic by the way
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 17:43   #37
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Yet it is perfectly valid to bring up SKs, since they are directly related to structures. At the moment, players do not need to send structure killers in order to roid with no losses. If you create PDS as structures, then you do. At the moment, most players haven't built structure killers. Under your plan they would, in order to hit PDS whores.

I'm not saying that he shouldn't have brought it up, I'm saying that he shouldn't criticise me for making an on topic response to the on topic point that he was making.

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
I started playing in Round 3. I initiated 300 roids straight off, and built 200 laser turrets and 90 EMP turrets to defend myself. Within three days, they were dead. Thankfully an experienced player took me aside in the IRC channel and explained that if I wanted to do well, I should never build PDS. It hasn't always stopped me - PDS was good in one of the early p2p rounds - but I took his lesson to heart. PDS is shit unless it really really isn't. Make any sense?

For the PDS structures not to be shit, they need a lot of armour and a lot of power. They also need to shoot before structure killers. End result? Stagnation, as players find themselves unable to take reasonable losses when landing on PDS whores.

Let's say that they can land on these PDS whores. They will attack with SKs, I assume this is a given? Well, factories are structures too, and I expect a fair few of those to go BOOM! This means that the newbie can't build ships which makes it even harder for him to defend himself in the future. This is bad. PDS is bad. It leadth to the dark side.
This new way of implementing PDS would be very different to the way it was back in Round 3. Since you can only have 150 structures you can only have so much PDS so it's only useful up to a certain point. Therefore I think that it will not cause stagnation. If anything it will make free planets more roid fat since the PDS whores in their galaxy will be better able to protect them.

And the argument that SK's will become more prolific is a valid one. However I think people are overestimating the impact that PDS will have. PDS whores imo will be limited to paid planets in pretty inactive galaxies so there won't be a particular need to build a lot of SK's to combat them.
All you need to do is wait for a PDS whore to become greedy and have more roids than he should. Then you swoop in and don't bother building any SK's for it because your losses will be acceptable and you won't be doing it often anyway.

My point earlier about making SK's a different class to your pod ships should help reduce the number of SK's around because it will reduce their ease of use.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 18:14   #38
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Yet everyone likes the fun feeling of a zero-loss attack. They will send structure killers against something threatening, even if they don't need to. They'll send them along for the hell of it. If it's hard to send SKs, they'll just bash and send overkill.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline  
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 18:25   #39
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Yet everyone likes the fun feeling of a zero-loss attack. They will send structure killers against something threatening, even if they don't need to. They'll send them along for the hell of it. If it's hard to send SKs, they'll just bash and send overkill.
Well, it is impossible to have a zero loss attack against a PDS whore. A PDS whore is likely to have 80% or more of his structures as PDS. I did say that SK's should target PDS first but even if they do that still leaves a lot of PDS to fire back. If you attack with SK's you can kill 20% of the structures, no more. Doesn't matter how much you send at it.

Perhaps a good idea would be to make PDS fire after all ships other than SK's. This means that your losses will not be lowered at all if you attack a PDS whore. Therefore someone who's just after some easy roids will not be so interested in destroying structures seeing as it won't reduce their losses.

I'm not sure if you understand the concept here. The idea is that PDS would be made up of your 150 available structures. The only thing that can shoot at the PDS will be SK's. Therefore sending a kill fleet will not gain you anything because you are still limited to only being able to destroy a maximum of 20% of the target's structures.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.

Last edited by ChubbyChecker; 19 Aug 2005 at 19:11.
ChubbyChecker is offline  
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 08:20   #40
demiGOD
the Sacred Pervert
 
demiGOD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,492
demiGOD is just really nicedemiGOD is just really nicedemiGOD is just really nicedemiGOD is just really nicedemiGOD is just really nice
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smudge
No, No, No and No once again.
PDS was like the Backstreet Boys - everyone thought at the time they were cool, now we look at them and laugh.
I never thought the Backstreet Boys were cool.

PDS was a love-hate relationship with a lot of us. I enjoyed it back then but never really had the chance to abuse it. I honestly think PDS would work if they only attacked structure killers. If you can also limit the production of PDS based on how many structures you have, might also work.

But bringing back PDS like they were before is NOT a good idea.
__________________
"....some might say, we will find a brighter day...."
-Oasis

Veneratio | Insomnia | F-Crew | Subh
demiGOD is offline  
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 22:04   #41
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by demiGOD
I never thought the Backstreet Boys were cool.
Damn, it was just me?

Quote:
Originally Posted by demiGod
PDS was a love-hate relationship with a lot of us. I enjoyed it back then but never really had the chance to abuse it. I honestly think PDS would work if they only attacked structure killers. If you can also limit the production of PDS based on how many structures you have, might also work.
Basically: an anti-SK structure. I suggested these before Round 14, but nothing has been accepted since 2003

Quote:
Originally Posted by demiGod
But bringing back PDS like they were before is NOT a good idea.
I totally agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker
Well, it is impossible to have a zero loss attack against a PDS whore. A PDS whore is likely to have 80% or more of his structures as PDS. I did say that SK's should target PDS first but even if they do that still leaves a lot of PDS to fire back. If you attack with SK's you can kill 20% of the structures, no more. Doesn't matter how much you send at it.
Yet you're still killing some of it. 5-6 waves with SKs and that's a lot of dead PDS. Not to mention all the dead factories, which are what we want players to USE to defend themselves anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker
Perhaps a good idea would be to make PDS fire after all ships other than SK's. This means that your losses will not be lowered at all if you attack a PDS whore. Therefore someone who's just after some easy roids will not be so interested in destroying structures seeing as it won't reduce their losses.
Since normal ships can't attack structures (which your PDS are), it doesn't matter if they fire first, last or in the middle tbfh. If you attack a PDS whore, they will cause you losses unless you can kill the PDS first. In this case, you can't. However, what if you're sending two waves at someone, or your alliance mate is the next wave? Makes sense to kill some PDS for him, yeah?

On alliance attacks, there should never be 'easy' roids. If they're easy, you're attacking too easy a target.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker
I'm not sure if you understand the concept here. The idea is that PDS would be made up of your 150 available structures. The only thing that can shoot at the PDS will be SK's. Therefore sending a kill fleet will not gain you anything because you are still limited to only being able to destroy a maximum of 20% of the target's structures.
Yet 20% > 0%. Why not? See my point above for clarification.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline  
Unread 21 Aug 2005, 14:53   #42
genosse27
Hamburger
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 221
genosse27 is a jewel in the roughgenosse27 is a jewel in the roughgenosse27 is a jewel in the roughgenosse27 is a jewel in the rough
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

no! dont ever think about bringing back pds!
__________________
4S, Elysium, Madcows, ToT, LCH, Vision, NoX ... long break. then lately
genosse27 is offline  
Unread 21 Aug 2005, 15:07   #43
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Damn, it was just me?


Basically: an anti-SK structure. I suggested these before Round 14, but nothing has been accepted since 2003 .
The current game engine will not allow this idea to be implemented.

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Since normal ships can't attack structures (which your PDS are), it doesn't matter if they fire first, last or in the middle tbfh. If you attack a PDS whore, they will cause you losses unless you can kill the PDS first. In this case, you can't. However, what if you're sending two waves at someone, or your alliance mate is the next wave? Makes sense to kill some PDS for him, yeah?

On alliance attacks, there should never be 'easy' roids. If they're easy, you're attacking too easy a target.
It does matter when the PDS fires because if the initiative of the PDS is lower than the attacking ships then it will kill some attacking ships that are unable to fire themselves because if they are dead then they are unable to fire.

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Yet 20% > 0%. Why not? See my point above for clarification.
PA Team has already proven themselves unwilling to get rid of SK's so going on about it won't help much.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline  
Unread 21 Aug 2005, 18:26   #44
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker
The current game engine will not allow this idea to be implemented.
I don't care. I'd rather not do anything than go for a half-assed option.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker
It does matter when the PDS fires because if the initiative of the PDS is lower than the attacking ships then it will kill some attacking ships that are unable to fire themselves because if they are dead then they are unable to fire.
Ah, I see what you're getting at now. Still not sure how much it matters though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker
PA Team has already proven themselves unwilling to get rid of SK's so going on about it won't help much.
SKs have great strategic use for alliances. However, tactically they're a nightmare (i.e. when used in everyday combat). With their current efficiency, I don't think they're much of a problem anyway.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline  
Unread 22 Aug 2005, 08:56   #45
noah02
The Original Terran
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Afghan atm
Posts: 1,633
noah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

*sigh* I have suggested this to my eyeballs already in said thread i mentioned before the excact same idea and still they turned it down with the quote that it was *PDS* and anything with a liking to PDS was a bad idea.
__________________
introduction-Gramma
The following is a list of problems found in various places throughout the manual and game. We love you Noah!

Written by Kloopy Wed Mar 16 22:06:43 2005

Retired just for a bit....

Proud to have been 1up, SiN, Wolfpack, Bluetuba and the leader of ARK.
noah02 is offline  
Unread 22 Aug 2005, 12:45   #46
MAdnRisKy
home wrecker
 
MAdnRisKy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The other side of the galaxy ;)
Posts: 1,041
MAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to beholdMAdnRisKy is a splendid one to behold
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Chubby, may i direct you to this post and we'll call it a day ey?
__________________
May the Farce be with you...

#pr0nstars - a pimp is for life, not just for christmas
MAdnRisKy is offline  
Unread 22 Aug 2005, 12:48   #47
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAdnRisKy
Chubby, may i direct you to this post and we'll call it a day ey?
There is a slight possibility that I may very well have changed my mind since then. I know it's a wild theory, I know it's unlikely, but people do sometimes change what they believe to be true when presented with new evidence that they hadn't thought of before.

Now let's call it a day shall we.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline  
Unread 22 Aug 2005, 17:39   #48
Kal
Inactive peon
 
Kal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,050
Kal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant future
Re: [Discuss, yet again] Bringing Back PDS

guess what... declined
__________________
Kal

Round 6-10 NoS member-->NoS junior HC
Round 10.5 FAnG member
Round 11-15 PATeam
Round 17-30 PATeam
Round 31 ???

Check out toastmonster.com for crazy illustrations and art
Kal is offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 22:30.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018