Development




	Here are the logs from the development hour held on 2nd March 2003. [Cwilms] K, will be mostly the same as previous dev rounds, expect i have emails of suggestions that ppl can vote on [Cwilms] The main areas which we will go through are: [Cwilms] Alliances [Cwilms] Ships [Cwilms] Sectors [Cwilms] Research [Cwilms] Market [Cwilms] General - Other [Cwilms] Fist a couple of votes from some e-mails [Cwilms] The addition of an alliance 'image' like sectors image, as a logo [From Sandu Cristian] [Cwilms] If you agree, say 'Yes', if not, say 'No' [acidrain] yes [narf] no [LiL_HoE] yes [haxx0rmunchkin] ues [Infinity] yes [tanner] yes [Caladan] no [MysticalParrot] yes [Phan] yes [Elvendom] yes [ashwin] No [Makaveli] yes [pArAdoXX] No [Garlick] :)yes [CimBom] yes [Groundsinho] yes [Haunter] yes [Squidy] Yes [Armageddon] yes [Sarah] no [Yoda] Yes [Xavier] yes [Bampot] yes [Nemesis821] yes [Ritty] no [HAPPYpoptart] yes [wolfpack] yes [Bengal] yes [KamiKaze] yes [pimpferg] yes [_Artreides] yes [Rubber] yes [Diablo] yes [Veratien] yes [Gemini] No [NR] yes [[Vallons]] yes [Mage] yes [Psychowurm] yes [Kensington] yes [EMP] yes [CimBom] YeS [Cwilms] k, seems like a yes to me [Cwilms] a confirmation box before you disband a ship in stardock [from multiple] [Cwilms] vote 'yes' or 'no' [Garlick] yes [NR] yes [Haunter] yes [narf] yes [LiL_HoE] no [z] yes [Nemesis821] yes [Squidy] Yes [pArAdoXX] No [Xavier] YES PLEASE! [haxx0rmunchkin] yes [_Artreides] yes [tanner] definately yes [Caladan] no [Phan] yes [Skelator] yes [Kensington] yes [[Vallons]] no [HAPPYpoptart] no [wolfpack] yes [Armageddon] yes [invis] yes [Elvendom] yes [Psychowurm] yes [Bampot] no [koka] yes [MysticalParrot] yes [acidrain] yes [Groundsinho] yes [EMP] yes [Ritty] YES! [pimpferg] yes [Rubber] yes [Spaceballs] yes [DreadWiccan] yes [ashwin] no [^Ricka^] no [Dj_Ma[N]t\|s] NO! [Dj_Ma[N]t\|s] NO! [Gemini] No [Veratien] yes [Mage] no [Yoda] Yes [Dragons_Realm] yes [Makaveli] no [CimBom] YES OFC! [GrinningDemon] No reason not to, so yes [Bluey] yes [CKND] yes [Cwilms] ... [Sarah] yes [Cwilms] Make Galaxy leader based on Sector networth and not Empire networth [From Narf] [Cwilms] vote yes or no [Yoda] no [narf] yes [Makaveli] no [Bampot] yes [z] yes [Elvendom] no [sGIBBy] no [NR] no [LiL_HoE] yes [HAPPYpoptart] no [Garlick] yes [CimBom] NEVER (SILLY NARF) [Weasle\|Slepping] yes [CKND] no [koka] no [Bengal] yes [bpork] yes [tanner] no [Mage] no [Skelator] no [ashwin] No [Armageddon] no [Sarah] no [haxx0rmunchkin] no [Rubber] no [Tiaret] yes [_Artreides] no [Xavier] yes [KamiKaze] no [Ritty] no [Dj_Ma[N]t\|s] NO [Haunter] no [wolfpack] no [Dj_Ma[N]t\|s] NO [[Vallons]] yes [MysticalParrot] no [Psychowurm] no [Veratien] no [Kensington] OFC NO [Groundsinho] no [Spaceballs] no [DreadWiccan] no [Squidy] Yes [GrinningDemon] Yes [Infinity] no [Bluey] no i suppose [Cwilms] k, thats a no then [Cwilms] k, enough of votes, there are some more for the end though.... [Cwilms] Move onto: Alliances [Cwilms] Any1 with an alliance suggestion, say 'Yes'. Remember, nothing that has been rejected last dev hour plz, and nothing too drastic... [acidrain] yes [Dj_Ma[N]t\|s] LOL [NR] yes [narf] if we e-mailed it should we still say yes? [Armageddon] yes [rady] yes [CimBom] lol [Garlick] yes [CimBom] yes [HAPPYpoptart] yes [Kensington] yes [Weasle] yes [Cwilms] narf: yes [ashwin] ^^what narf sed [narf] yes [ashwin] yes [Bluey] yes [Caladan] yes, i think [Cwilms] k, acid: go ahead.. [acidrain] being able to put someone hc so they can have access to accepting ppl too [Cwilms] Those in the list, plz type out your suggestion in advance..... [acidrain] say if al has to go for a few days [acidrain] cause most ppl start letting ppl loggin in to al's account [Cwilms] this was suggested by a couple of ppl, and sounds like a good idea [Cwilms] obviously logging into al's account is not exactly the solution, that'll just get ya deletee [Cwilms] different levels of controls, like AAL which will have control of accepting ppl and removing ppl? [Cwilms] aswell as relation access? [acidrain] ya thats good [acidrain] maybe in forums too name from AAL or something [Cwilms] k, will try and add this, not sure if i can add it for next round, but it will be added [Cwilms] NR.... [NR] how bout an alliance market, fund or aid sending option? [Cwilms] nope, this has been rejected sooooo many times, im not even going there. [narf] 3. small alliances, special forum threads for moderators only (like for hc use) and remove peace actually blocking you from hitting [narf] like alliance limit reduce to 15-30, makes more competition harder to deadlock [narf] threads that can only be seen by people who put in forum mod access, so leaders can communicate [narf] and the peace thing makes fools in alliances not able to start wars by being morons [narf] i think the thread one is a rip off of something weasle said long ago [Cwilms] don't understand the first thing you saud [Cwilms] but, there is no point in reducing the AL limit, it will only lead to more wing or sister alliances [narf] make alliance max size like 15-30, its much harder for an alliance of 15-30 people to lock down the round [narf] but wings will screw each other in the longrun...its happened before [narf] and its harder to organize wings [Cwilms] the threads thing: the AL can just msg the relevant ppl or use an IM ?? [narf] yes, but it makes it so they can all discuss issues if their not online same time [narf] if you have 3-5leaders as a lot of alliances do [Cwilms] would be too much work, for little gain. [narf] K [Cwilms] plus if you want an alliance limit of 15, why would you have 5 leaders? [narf] shrug, well if you do 1 the other isn't as needed [Cwilms] have to move on anyway [narf] :P [Cwilms] ... [Armageddon] Sector Relationships [Armageddon] Like the alliance reationships, but between sectors [Cwilms] thats for sector discussion, which is l8r [Cwilms] ... [rady] Lower alliance cap but have a limit on how many alliances you can have peace with. Also, the ability to set alliance relation to neutral without declaring war. And the last thing deals with alliance leaders having to stay in the alliance. Alliance tags not appearing for maybe 2 ticks or so. This way alliance leader has to stay in their alliance but they can still hide in a mass of members if they have tons of possible members [rady] ... [Cwilms] when an alliance is just created, then it is obvious who the AL is, if they cannot leave their alliance, how can they hide their identity? [rady] thats why i said you hide the alliance tag for 2 ticks [rady] It does not appear for 2 ticks or 1 tick [rady] no1 will know who is in that alliance until the tag appears [rady] I found it quite easily to find al's this round and killed several of them within the first tick [Cwilms] that would be v.hard to implement, plus you would have to get everyone to join in the first ticks?? [rady] ok, someone just said [rady] tag not appear until there are 5 members [rady] or 10 [rady] its a good ideal to hide al's from warmongers like me that i find it terribly easy to find al's [rady] it may just take you awhile to implement it [Cwilms] lower alliance tag: no, allow AL to change from peace to neutral: yes, AL cannot leave own alliance: NO [rady] ..ok [rady] then you will continue to have alliance leaders that join other alliances and hide the entire round [Sarah] [Bluey] sarah.. if i'm not there when he calls me, tell him i said i had the same question as acid [Cwilms] ... [CimBom] we should be able to have 2 alliance leaders so it would be harder for an alliance to die which makes the game more fun , becuase u just have to keep looking for the alliance leader also usually AL's are Usually the little members of an alliance so its easy to find them but if we have 2 AL's it would be better. also have a limit of 3 peaces per alliance [CimBom] which then rady wont be able to find who u are [CimBom] :D [Jam] alliances are already hard enough to kill with ALs hiding all over the place...that'd make it nearly impossible [-- just my opinion [CimBom] ... [Jam] Cwilms's is the one that matters.. [Cwilms] i agree with jam [CimBom] but rady says its easy [CimBom] plus it aint that hard [Cwilms] why limit the no. of peace an alliance can have?? [Jam] the limit of peace an alliance can have was to balance the wing factor if alliance cap was lowered [CimBom] becuase then the little ones in the aliance may accidently hit other big alliance which will cause a war [CimBom] which would be fun [Jam] according to rady ^ [Jam] a limit on peace would be good...would encourage war [CimBom] yah [Jam] war == fun [CimBom] yep [CimBom] so the round would be full of fat land ppl [CimBom] lots of war = fat ppl [Cwilms] k, will consider cap on peace, but not multiple AL's [CimBom] but the 2 alliance leaders would work aswell [Cwilms] ... [Kensington] wrote wrong word, devoice me.:( [Weasle] Alliance leader must remain in the alliance, Aliiance tag doesn't doesnt show till 10 members join helping to hide the Al identity (seems rady beat me to this one) ALternate, if the Al leaves the allaince for over X ticks the alliance gets deleted [Cwilms] well, thats all been covered [Weasle] ye [ashwin] 2) Alliance duties [ashwin] Current Problem: The only person in the alliance with any sort of administration duty is the alliance leader, therefore the alliance is basically 'frozen' while the AL is offline. [ashwin] Suggested Solution: Certain empires could be given special status within the alliance, as chosen by the alliance leader. Examples of possible positions are: [ashwin] Alliance secretary - Can change alliance description and moderate forums [ashwin] Recruitment officer - Can accept/remove empires [ashwin] War Leader - Can change alliance status and moderate forums [ashwin] Assistant Alliance Leader - Can perform all functions of the AL apart from deleting the alliance [ashwin] (Controversial) Alliance Successor - Takes over as alliance leader after current AL dies. [ashwin] These positions would help share the load of administering an alliance, and apart from the alliance successor, i can see no major downsides or game changes due to them. They would be chosen by the alliance leader. [ashwin] 3) Market times - [ashwin] thats from my email [ashwin] been a bit covered [ashwin] and [ashwin] 4) Alliance size - [ashwin] Current problem: SF is currently littered with many 1-2 member alliances which arent adding to the quality of the game. [ashwin] Suggested Solution: After an alliance is created, it is in 'Trial' status. It then has a set amount of time, eg 48 hours to gather together a set amount of members, eg 5. If it fails to do this, then it will be deleted. This would mean that to create a new alliance, an alliance leader would have to have at least a reasonable following. This could also mean, if successful, that some alliance features could be implemented that were previous [Cwilms] k, let me get your email.... [ashwin] i pasted all the stuff about alliance there ^^ [Cwilms] alliance duties: yes, im principle, there will be multiple ppl to admin an alliance [Cwilms] but not in the same way you have described [ashwin] OK [ashwin] i mean ok [Cwilms] alliance size: nope [Cwilms] some ppl might want to be in a small alliance [ashwin] less than 5 members [ashwin] sort of defeats the purpose of alliance [ashwin] neways i ahve to go now [Cwilms] k [ashwin] so for the rest of my suggestions on other topics [ashwin] u have my emails [Cwilms] k [Cwilms] all, no part from al duties btw [Cwilms] ... [Caladan] The AL notice - on the overview page - should be something more like the mod forums ability - password protected so the AAL or HC can change it if necessary. [Caladan] A way for the AAL or HC - probably another password protected ability - to mass message the alliance or parts of it. It would help in organization for alliances that are not as IRC active, and would be useful for remakes. [Caladan] I think my first suggestion's mostly been covered by ashwin's suggestions [Cwilms] Yes, when multiple alliacne admins are added, once of the features will be AL notice [Cwilms] mass messaging: no [Caladan] I think if limited to a few people, and with a limit of once per tick, it could be useful [Cwilms] emails, in game messaging, irc, IM, there are enough ways, without spamming the DB [Cwilms] Jam... [Jam] n00b exit button =D [Jam] available 2 weeks into the round [Cwilms] yes, i think it could be usefull. [Jam] =) [Cwilms] will take a vote meh thinks [Jam] ok, sounds good [Cwilms] Any1 who thinks being able to leave newbie mode at any time, once 2 weeks into the game vote 'Yes', if not 'No' [Jam] Yes [Sarah] Yes [pimpferg] yes [bpork] no [tanner] yes [narf] YES [z] yes [Tiaret] yes [acidrain] yesss! [lohjx] yes [HAPPYpoptart] yes [wolfpack] yes [Phan] yes [_Artreides] yes [haxx0rmunchkin] yes [pArAdoXX] Yes [KamiKaze] no [CimBom] I Have A quiestion what is it? [rady] yes [GrimFist] yes [Eemu] no [skunk] yes [Bengal] yes [Virtual] yes [MysticalParrot] yes [Makaveli] yes [Xavier] yes [Bampot] yes [Weasle] yes [^Ricka^] no [Rubber] yes [Garlick] yes [Spaceballs] yes [Skelator] no [CimBom] wats n00b exit?? [Mage] no [Jam] oh wow... [Yoda] yes [[Vallons]] yes [Jam] leave newbie mode [_Harkonnen] yes [LiL_HoE] yes [DarkNemesis] yes [Jam] by clicking a button [GrinningDemon] Yes [Caladan] no [Caelis] yes [CimBom] OoO [Armageddon] yes [tanner] read above cimbom [CimBom] i see [Gemini] yes [EMP] yes [ashwin] yes [CimBom] Yes [Kensington] yes [Makaveli] wow [Sarah] Can we add a condition to that [Cwilms] ...? [Jam] yeah sure [Sarah] the accoutn must be at least 6 hours old or you could exit suicide - recreate - exit suicide [Jam] yeah [Jam] that's a good condition... [Cwilms] k, i agree [Jam] might want to repoll it [Jam] with that condition [Cwilms] ... [Garlick] possibility of mask msgs from the alliance people to ppl who is not other AL so u can reply a direct msg .... Also u can give direct Orders to members online without having to reveal your empire. To avoid Als spamming for recruit, allow it just to reply msg or to give orders to the actual members... Also if if it is possible also mask msg fro AAL or whatever new position u creating [Cwilms] no, this has been asked before, at the moment, you can message other alliances annonymously if you are an AL. [Garlick] yeah but u cannot msg your members :( [Cwilms] there would be no real advantage to applying this to every1, it would only result in spam [Cwilms] There is an AL notice, forums, IRC etc..... [Garlick] ok [Cwilms] ----------- SECTORS ---------------------- [Cwilms] Those who have a suggstion for alliance, say 'Yes'. Nothing that has been rejected b4, and nothing drastic. One Suggstion per person!! [acidrain] yes [z] Yes [Mage] Yes [rady] yes [Cwilms] sectors* [Eemu] yes [Bampot] Wasn't ships next? [Bengal] yes [Scoobie_Snax] yes [Armageddon] yes..again [narf] yes [CimBom] yes [CimBom] lol [Jam] heh.. [Dj_Ma[N]t\|s] RaAAr [Makaveli] uugghh if only i could think of a question [Makaveli] lol [CimBom] hehehe [Cwilms] ... [acidrain] Empire must be inactive X number of days before he gets kicked out, cause sl's abuse this in war or when ppl dont vote for them, they kick them out and hit them. [Jam] kicking is also for abusive people is it not? [Jam] if someone bothers the sector by spamming forums etc. [acidrain] well maybe the 50% of votes to yes, need to be done before hes kicked out [acidrain] redlined* [Cwilms] kick/rejection is not only intended for inactivity, its also, for some1 being abusive etc.... [acidrain] but if the sl is being abusive [Cwilms] If some1 is openly abusing it, then they won't remain SL for long [z] sector news should contain empire alliance tags. [Cwilms] why? [z] usually it easier to see who i can retal or not [z] alliances we have peace with, cannot be retalled. [Cwilms] not sure, will take vote: [Sarah] It alerady does i think [Jam] sector news already contains alliance tags [z] anyway, it's not very important, we have far more important matters then this, ignore if takes up too much work ;) [Cwilms] ...? [z] it does? o-O [Jam] yeah [Cwilms] you sure jam? [z] i don't think so... i did before... but now? [z] it even [Cwilms] hmm, let me check [Sarah] It does on eclipse [Cwilms] yes, it does. [Mage] SL isnt determined by time of signup when empires who have 1 vote each for SL, but rather if votes are tied then no one is SL for the period of time. This would make for no more first sign up is always SL [Cwilms] whats the point.....its better to have an SL than none at all [Mage] because its not fair to have automatic SL [Mage] and it works if votes are tied [Mage] if there are say 4 and 4 [Mage] then the first beats the tie [Cwilms] its been like this for ever, i don't see the point in changing it. If its tied, at the moment i think, its the oldest member that will become SL. [Mage] if sector is that divided, there shouldnt be a SL until it is resolved [Cwilms] which seems fair enough to me [Mage] k.... [rady] Less leniency on people that use inappropriate sector images. There were several times this round people put up bad sector images. You should make a global warning about sector images and if anyone is caught doing it. They get deleted or their empire frozen for set number of hours. [rady] one of my members got banned from computer because someone had pokemon giving head [Jam] ...digusting =O [Cwilms] As Sarah suggested to me, we will implement a sector image report page, so ppl can report this, and we can take appropriate action. [Eemu] Alliance tag colours appearing in sector/alliance/personal news (this was rejected before summer) [Cwilms] ... [Cwilms] The reason it doesn't appear is because of the way the allliance/sector news table is setup [Cwilms] it doesn't record the color tag of the alliance [Eemu] rejected again? [Cwilms] yes :) [Eemu] very well [Cwilms] ... [Cwilms] Bampot... [Bampot] I was on ships not sectors [Cwilms] ... [Bengal] nm-points covered by acid and rady [Scoobie_Snax] 1/2 the return time on ships that attack people in your own sector - used to encourage eliminating inactives or abusive players [Cwilms] ... [Cwilms] that isn't really an incentive. [Jam] I'd have to say that's luck... [Jam] if u had a sector full of inactives [narf] longer sector market time like 8ticks, w/ only 15 people in your sector, 4ticks isn't always long enough for someone in sector to see it... [Jam] u'd be largest in game @ start easily [Cwilms] should organise it via forums, so it is placed on at a time. [narf] thats all devoice me :P [Cwilms] ... [CimBom] hello again [CimBom] can u set the sector market for a mimumin of 1 tick [CimBom] so that ppl cant do the market cheat [CimBom] cos it annoys meh [Cwilms] yes [CimBom] thxs [Cwilms] -------------------------------- SHIPS ------------------------------- [Jam] Cwilms: maybe for this section have people put \|suggestion in their nick [Jam] if they have one [Jam] could make it easier to see who has one.. [Cwilms] any1 who has a suggestion for ships, say 'Yes'. Nothing that has been rejected b4. Nothing drastic. One suggestion per person. [Bampot] yes [sGIBBy] yes [acidrain] oh yes! [Jam] just an idea.. [rady] yes [CimBom] yes [Weasle] yes [evilpoptart] yes [z] yes [Makaveli] yes [Caladan] ye [EMP] yes [Spaceballs] yes [Cwilms] channel is +N jam :) [Jam] ah, lol [LiL_HoE] ehhh i guess i wont suggest nething =( [CimBom] wow everyone says yes [Jam] nevermind then [CimBom] :D [Mage] yes [^Ricka^] yes [narf] yes [Caelis] no :P [sGIBBy] The Gunship seemed really bad to me, maybe it could be reviewed, it just seemed not as good as the destroyer which was supposedly worse. [sGIBBy] maybe its just me, but it never seemed to do anything compared to a destroyer [sGIBBy] thats all [Cwilms] A gunship has more power than a destroyer [Cwilms] thats its adv. [sGIBBy] never seemed to use attacking power though [sGIBBy] and the upkeep is way too high [Cwilms] ? [sGIBBy] (thanks spaceballs) [Cwilms] i will look at ship balancing for next round, but think the ships are fairly evenly balanced. [Cwilms] ... [Bampot] Bring back the Mantis [Bampot] With bigger fleets now than when it was around it'd be more used because it'd be both [Bampot] more useful against 12 ships than 9 and less of a burden on 12 ships than 9. [Cwilms] Alot of ppl have asked not too have EMP ships returned, plus i've removed whats needed for them from the DB [Cwilms] so, no go [Bampot] Fighters [Bampot] Was shot down last time but put it to vote. In the test R1 style, set number of bays on [Bampot] each ship. By giving the sov more than the dread would give a choice of best ship since [Bampot] fighters could absorb damage and be destroyed. [Cwilms] 1 suggestion per pers, and this has been rejected b4 [Cwilms] for many reasons [Bampot] Thanks for time [Cwilms] ... [Jam] I didn't have one.. [Jam] didn't say I did either...heh [CimBom] The Eagle should be more stronger becuase it completly sucks against a dd therefore its harder to bash noobies, and also Sarah ur talon's on eclipse have a little problem [Sarah] they are the same as on merlin [CimBom] nope [CimBom] when u explore it only gives 1 land/riods [CimBom] which is wierd [Jam] that's how it is on merlin [Jam] I can assure you... [Cwilms] Ships are same on merlin and eclipse [CimBom] i thought it was 3000k power 1 land [Sarah] They are only 6k power core - you get 1 roid/land for every 4k power put to sensors [CimBom] well nevermind im never gonna explore with a talon [Cwilms] 4k [Cwilms] not 3k [CimBom] OoO [Jam] lol [CimBom] well im stupid [CimBom] :D [Cwilms] as i said i will look at ship balancing. [Cwilms] ... [rady] The bringing back of Fighters. THe only difference this time will be that they are unlimited. The cost of fighters would increase like the land/roids formula. Therefore you are encouraged to build up a ship and make it extremely strong. The cost also increases in initial cost in proportion to the cost of the ship you are equipping it on. Fighters also cannot be removed so that way you are encouraged to keep building up one sh [rady] but i was just told this was said after i got disconnected.. [rady] i would like a vote on the matter, actually [Cwilms] yes it was already rejected. [rady] i think my ideal counters your objections to it last time [rady] it solves the problems you had, about the space and stuff [rady] and it increases the cost and makes it relatively harder to get it as you build more in [Cwilms] When fighters were in the game, hardly any1 used them [rady] can we have a vote on my ideal [rady] I think it would work [rady] and others are encouraging me to ask for a vote in notices [Jam] well, Cwilms, then there were more ships [Jam] people would still be building at the end of the round [rady] unlimited fighters and the cost increases [Jam] most people get max dreads before the end... [rady] I am sure people would use fighters if they know they can get their favorite ship design to have more damage than a stupid dread [Cwilms] as i said, nothing drastic, this will change the entire game...... [Jam] true [rady] doesnt seem drastic to me =] [Jam] rady: u didn't code it (= it all depends on how the game is coded [Cwilms] adding fighters would be a v.big change, code wise [rady] ofc i didnt code it [rady] what about looking into it [rady] for future development [rady] its a process u can work on little by little [rady] to eventually change the game [rady] remember when you first made the game we had all those small ships like sk [rady] but you eventually changed it into something new [rady] that was a drastic change to the game [Cwilms] Im already looking into another idea, which is the ability to upgrade the capital ships, fighters are not the way to go. [rady] and the game got better, this could get it better also [Weasle] my suggetion to much coding, I'll post it in the pf's for you to consider for future. [Cwilms] k [evilpoptart] bring back emp ships. simple enough. I loved those things, send 1 with a buncha dreads. fun. also, give rady his own ship, but make it the easies ship in the game to kill and give it no real purpose :) [Cwilms] as i said, no to the emp ships [z] too bad the fighter-custumizeable ships are rejected again... fighters as a research, only one type, with like 100 power, 100 hull and 100 shields. Could be added to the main ships shield/hull points, to decrease coding difficulty. Basically adding to a ship one more column with 'fighters contained'. Wouldn't swamp the database at all. This added to rady's suggestion with the increasing cost of adding them. [z] .... [Cwilms] better...but as i said, i'm already looking into a way of doing virtually the same thing, just not with fighters [Makaveli] Increase the amount of ships you can hold say by 3. Also regulate the maintanace cost by what your income is. Cause I have seen alot of ppl go into negative credits cause of this; they cant exactly keep up with the cost of the ships as they expand. [Cwilms] if you cannot maintain a ship, then do not build it [Jam] lol, simple enough =) [Sarah] perhaps a warning that pops up to say you cannot afford to maintain this ship when you go to build it and it asks for confirmation [Cwilms] adding more ships, will increase tick time, also, just adding more ships doesn't make the game better [Jam] with balanced income it'd be possible for 150/200 roid/land people to get dreads, would not balance the game at all [Cwilms] If you cannot maintain it, you can always disable it until which time that you can. [Makaveli] err no i mean like the cost stays the same [Makaveli] but when u own it teh maintance cost changes [Cwilms] ?? [Makaveli] nvm [Makaveli] came out [Makaveli] wrong [Makaveli] made an ass of my self [Cwilms] .. [EMP] to not pay maint cost on fleets that are away from the empire since they cant be maintained at that time.....same for exploring ships. [Cwilms] nope, you still have to maintain a ship when it is out and about, more so [Cwilms] ... [Cwilms] gone shopping apparently [Spaceballs] my question was about sectors [Spaceballs] would u like me to wait until misc? or may i say it now.. [Cwilms] go ahead [Spaceballs] my idea..since i'm like always Sl i think it'd be better if u could kick more then 1 person at a time. but have a limit like they must be inactive for x amouunt of time plus be alloud to kick 1 person with no time limit cuz they might just be a pest [Spaceballs] like keep the whole vote system for deleting them. but make it so u can get rid of them faster...to hopefuly get active members in your sector [Cwilms] there are only so many attacks ppl can do in a sector, making more targets will not get rid of them quicker [Cwilms] when some1 dies, just select the next person [Spaceballs] it would make it easier to delete them all at once though [Spaceballs] thats how i was looking at it...although ti does give more targets to feed off of also [Cwilms] i don't see how, plus the way the table for sectors is setup, would make it hard to do. [Spaceballs] because I have noticed when a person gets to like 15 roids and 45 land [Spaceballs] no one wants to hit them [Sarah] Vote them out then [Cwilms] indeed [Mage] Smaller hull/shields ship as a kamikaze, costing a large amount of one or two resources, e.g. 3m creds, 20k power, etc. This ship is designed especially as a suicide bomber and cant be used to gain anything from attacks, only to hurt enemy ships or destroy land/roids ((maybe)) a decent amount. After an attack the ship doesnt come back, because it dies upon impact. Maybe lesser resources needed and has to be researched or something. [Cwilms] its already too easy to kill ppl off when they are targets, this will just make it even easier [Cwilms] ... [Cwilms] Ricka??? [narf] Customizable ships: designated powercore and hull, but we can change the powercore to go to weapon power/shields [Cwilms] ... [narf] am asking for a friend, when i asked him to clarify he said: like the ships in Test-r1 but instead of nodes, the ship limit, and different ships use up different ship limit spaces [Cwilms] BRB [Jam] wb [narf] shall i repeat? [Cwilms] plz [narf] Customizable ships: designated powercore and hull, but we can change the powercore to go to weapon power/shields [narf] am asking for a friend, when i asked him to clarify he said: like the ships in Test-r1 but instead of nodes, the ship limit, and different ships use up different ship limit spaces [Cwilms] I'm looking into a way to upgrade capital ships atm, this would be similar to what your suggesting [narf] hopefully to you it makes more sense then my newbieness [Cwilms] not sure what you mean by what was in Test-r1 [narf] we had ships that used different nodes [narf] umm yeah [narf] devoice me :P [Jam] lol [Cwilms] ---------------------------- MARKET ----------------------------- [Cwilms] any1 who has suggstion for market, say 'Yes'. Nothing that has been rejected b4, especially Alliance Market!! [Jam] yes [sGIBBy] yes!! [Garlick] yes [sGIBBy] yes!! [CimBom] yesssssssssssssss [Bengal] yes [CimBom] :D [The_Soulforged] yes [GrinningDemon] Yes [evilpoptart] yes [Cwilms] jam... [Jam] dropdown box selecting how long the ships are on the market [Jam] 2 being the minimum [Jam] 8 being the maximum [Jam] or something along those lines [Cwilms] hmm, yes, perhaps [Cwilms] vote perhaps? [Sarah] Maybe a longer minimum imho -Subway- yes yes :) [Jam] yeah...the numbers might need to be modded [Jam] vote sounds good to me [Cwilms] Vote 'yes' for custom ticks for market items, min 2-4 ticks, or 'no' for not. [Elvendom1] yes [Bluey] yes! =) [evilpoptart] yes [Eemu] no, useless [EMP] explain it better [Subway] yes [Jam] yes [_Artreides] yes [Scoobie_Snax] yes [GrinningDemon] Yes [Bampot] yes [LiL_HoE] y [Masamune] Yes [tanner] no [z] yes [The_Soulforged] yes [Virtual] yes [Spaceballs] yes [wolfpack] yes [skunk] yes [Bengal] yes [Sarah] yes [Skelator] yes [Xavier] yes, min 2 [Filthy_Sanchez] yes [Garlick] yes (i need to send them before 4 hours....) no matter for the cash i get many times i just wanna give it to someone not getting cash [sGIBBy] yes [Haunter] yes [MysticalParrot] yes! i was gonna say that [Phan] yes [Jam] I count 2 no's [Jam] lol [Cwilms] k, thats yes then [sGIBBy] sorry [CimBom] hi there [CimBom] is there a possibilty of u just selling a ship to a person u selected [Cwilms] OMG [CimBom] and also ppl bid like 2 secs after tick which sucks [Jam] lol [Jam] would make multi'ing crazy Cim [Bengal] nm-we took care of mine already-lol [The_Soulforged] ok. a combined thing [The_Soulforged] for starts, a limit on how close to the end of bid time you can place a new bid [The_Soulforged] and a limit on how often bids can be placed [The_Soulforged] the first one aimed more at preventing last second steals [Jam] how often bids can be placed would eliminate playing off the market to catch up in score [The_Soulforged] hmm. ok. devoice [Jam] and last second steals are a part of any auction =) [Cwilms] limiting it to another time, would just move the last second bid forward to another point [GrinningDemon] Well [GrinningDemon] Could you put on something to restrict enemy empires nabbing your ships? [Sarah] Yes its called not auctioning your ship [GrinningDemon] To stop the biggest person in the sector stopping aid getting to smaller [Cwilms] its an open market, meaning "Open" [Cwilms] part of the game [GrinningDemon] And in sector? [GrinningDemon] You want to aid someone [evilpoptart] my stuff is covered except, I wanna be able to trade rescources. if this has been covered de-voice me. [Cwilms] Skipping research for time sake [Jam] lol [Cwilms] -------------------------------------- GENERAL / Other / Uncovered ------------------------------- [Sarah] yes [Cwilms] If you have a suggestion which has not been covered by the headings above, say 'Yes'. 1 per person. [pArAdoXX] Yes [evilpoptart] yes [z] yes [Weasle] yes [narf] yes [skunk] yes [Garlick] YES :) plz [sGIBBy] yes!!! [CimBom] Yes [Tiaret] yes [Weasle] yes, I have 2 [rady] yes [LiL_HoE] yes [Eemu] yes [wolfpack] yes [Cwilms] sarah... [Sarah] Move reported messages to a seperate table so that they are still seen by admins if the user deletes them instead of being deleted before they have been seen by the admin [Cwilms] yeah, ok. [pArAdoXX] EMP [pArAdoXX] Shields are a bit useless, to make it worth the power loss why not have a system like this : [pArAdoXX] Empire A 10,000 [pArAdoXX] Empire B 7,500 [pArAdoXX] Empire C 12,500 [pArAdoXX] Empire C could EMP Empire A but Empire B can't. By limiting EMPing to people with less power than yourself it'd make shields more useful. Think about it, shields drawn from 10k fusion plants will be better than shields drawn from 2.5k fusion plants [Cwilms] shields are not useless, this was asked earlier b4 dev hour, and ppl wanted it left as it was [z] races: Add to ferrion as a bonus the adv power already researched. Current bonus does nothing whatsoever. THis way it could live up the versudens strenght, maybe increase a bit other races' bonuses too. Basically race balancing. [z] Add a variable to each empire that counts number of hours alive. For 100 hours alive, the race should be getting +1% bonus on everything. (pop, power, income, eventually attack/def strenght) But this could mean lots of coding. [z] every 100 hours alive +1% bonus [Cwilms] Yes, i will try and balance the races for next round, i know its not atm, and there is no ferrion bonus [z] ;_; [z] my poor favourite race sux [Jam] lol [z] :) [z] good to have that covered [evilpoptart] Probes: i want to be able to do more than get intel with probes. for example stealing rescources and cadets. or doing damage to ships. that way now there is a real advantage to haveing good probers. [Cwilms] not sure [evilpoptart] atm an alliance only really needs 1-2 probers and the rest r attackers [evilpoptart] and it is usually a waste to do a rescource atk [Cwilms] i think its ok as it is, and there is already enough to do, without probes [Cwilms] ... [Cwilms] Garlick?? [Sarah] Gone fishing [Cwilms] lol, ok [Jam] lol [Cwilms] weasle... [Weasle] Planetary shields are useless. I must have missed the earlier discusion :( Add more allaince Tag colours, like Pink [Weasle] Pink is pretty [Cwilms] i will add some more colours. [Cwilms] ... [narf] research: 'adv stardock' - ships repear twice as fast, and shields tick 1.5times faster (6% per tick instead of 4%) [narf] btw i was 1 of the people turning down shield change, like paradoxx's idea tho [Cwilms] will add that as reasech item. faster repair [CimBom] Can We Traid Land By Any Chance Also The Probing Sucks When We Send 200k Probes Against 6k Probes U Loose Like 10K Cant J00 Lower That Abit [CimBom] LOL [CimBom] btw weasle pink sucks [Cwilms] you can lower probe loss by using shields [CimBom] i do [CimBom] but i loose alot [Cwilms] it is already only like 2.5% [Cwilms] it is low enough [CimBom] 1.5% would be betta [Cwilms] trade land??....no [Cwilms] ... [skunk] is there any chance we could send Credits in the sector with out the sl haveing to do it ? so if the sl anit on and 1 of my m8s need cash i can send it from me to him [skunk] not from the fund. [Cwilms] too much of prob of abuse [Cwilms] just get the SL to do it [skunk] if they r in the same sector ye [Cwilms] when they are next on [Tiaret] alliance tags in the personal news? when at war i want to know who is hitting me when i log on. [Cwilms] ... [Cwilms] erm, possibly [Cwilms] can't remember if that is easy enough to do or not [Cwilms] if it is, i will,. [Sarah] We can make it easy [Weasle] I already went [Weasle] goooo Pink [rady] About removing the capability to do "the market trick" i suggest keep it as it is now... I mean tho actually many ppl consider it as a trick it is teh only way u can defend your empire when u are marked as a target... no way removing it as it is the only "active" way u can defend your empire, if this is removed then give us the possibility to choose what ships are defending and which aren't [rady] garlick's ideal [rady] but he was away from keyboard when it was his turn [Cwilms] disable them? [rady] erm [rady] devoice me [rady] and voice garlick [Garlick[Fishing]] enabling them requires 2 ticks [Garlick[Fishing]] i mean "active " defecne [Cwilms] you mean add it so it takes 2 ticks to enable ships? [Garlick[Fishing]] other way they just kill your ships and u are done [Garlick[Fishing]] i meam removing the two ticks for enabling [Cwilms] it takes 2 tick to enable ships?? [Garlick[Fishing]] yes [Cwilms] news 2 me [Garlick[Fishing]] :) [Cwilms] sarah? [Sarah] if you disable them you cannot enable them immediately you have to have been disabled for 3 ticks [Garlick[Fishing]] that is why we do the market trick [Sarah] that was one you added a couple of rounds back [Cwilms] oh, ok [Sarah] like when you retur a ship from exploring type thing [Cwilms] so remove the time cap on enable/disable and add a 2 tick min to market?? [Garlick[Fishing]] yes why not [Garlick[Fishing]] do a poll then [Sarah] NO [Cwilms] ? [Jam] lol [Sarah] the disable thing was put in to stop people disabling ships over the tick [Sarah] then re enabling them after the tick [Jam] yeah [Sarah] that way they didnt pay maint etc [Cwilms] hmm [Garlick[Fishing]] the thing i want is just for being able to get ships outta rank attack so they are not killed same time and we can still try to manage some defence [Jam] for example before I died the 2nd time, I could have made 1 million a tick...but maint brought it way down to like 500k, double the income makes the effort worth it [Garlick[Fishing]] if no better way... the market tricks wotks for now [Garlick[Fishing]] *works [Cwilms] k, well will have to leave cap on disable/enable [Garlick[Fishing]] don't remove it [Cwilms] will look into this more, have to move on [LiL_HoE] i already told jam about it [LiL_HoE] =Þ [LiL_HoE] devoice me [Cwilms] ...? [Eemu] EMPing costing 10% instead of the too low 250 (alternative for para's suggestion maybe) [Jam] Cwilms: it was more of a bug, so I'll tell ya after dev hour [Eemu] (as it was before?) [Cwilms] thats too hugh [Eemu] 250 is too low [Eemu] EMPing should hurt [Eemu] 5% maybe? [Cwilms] it was changed because it wasn't worth that mich power [Cwilms] Vote: [Eemu] If you want to lower shields it should cost more than 250 [Cwilms] Vote yes if you want the cost of EMPing increased, or no, for not [Sarah] yes [Subway] no [whoami] yes [Bampot] yes [Weasle] votes, % of empires NW [LiL_HoE] yes [pArAdoXX] Yes [Spaceballs] yes [Eemu] yes [DarkNemesis] no [erogen] yes [pimpferg] no [Masamune] Yes [in_flames] no [Haunter] yes [evilpoptart] no [tanner] no [Bengal] yes [Weasle] yes [EMP] no [Jam] yes [MysticalParrot] no [rady] yes [Caelis] yes [Bluey] nooooo [Phan] no [Kensington] yes [narf] no, makes newbies emping so cheap [The_Soulforged] yes [Subway] no [Elvendom1] no [Filthy_Sanchez] yes [Diablo] yesssssssssssssss [Diablo] yesssssssssssssss [Tiaret] yes [Skelator] no [Bluey] no b/c it can be to expensive for big ppl [z] yes [Jam] 21 yesses [Cwilms] k, will increase it [Cwilms] not sure how high tho [Jam] well, I dunno how many nos there were [wolfpack] dps doing damage since they can hold off a attack they should have some attack pointsto do some damage to the fleet attacking [Jam] 14 nos [Jam] so yeah.. [Cwilms] would mean ppl would lose ships MUCH easier if some1 has enough dplats [Cwilms] K, thats it, i will stay in channel for while, if ppl want to ask further stuff, or discuss whats been said