More hours of my life have been spent playing on Canada West, hours of my life I will never ever get back.
THE CONTINUING ADVENTURES OF KHAN
posted 08-14-2001 08:58 AM
Please head to the Eastern border of Hydran space and eradicate the Klingon raider base that has sprung up at 78,31, or there abouts. I was working on it this morning, even managed to draft the person who I think created it, Khan. Unfortunately, the mission ended up bugged, and wouldn’t end after we had both left the map, so I alt-f4′d out. I won’t be able to long back on till around 5 or 6 pm CST, as I need to get some sleep before work tonight. So if one or two of you wouldn’t mind, there’s a little cleaning up to do yet. When I left, he had just placed a base on a planet hex as I captured one of the empty hexes adjacent to it.
Commodore H’Val HMS Illustrious, Overseer Battle Carrier
It’s… KHAAAAAAN! Surely his lonely C7 will find some much-needed PvP action now! Let’s look at the battle reports…
That damn H’Val. How dare he use cheap powerful fighters as the Hydrans! I suppose if H’Val were playing Mirak, he would insist on using drones too. If your fighters or missiles ever engage Khan, please don’t forget to whine about his cheap C7 missile defense. But at least Khan can get a fight now… or can he?
A strong departure from his previous stance! Unfortunately he was beaten too quickly to further expound upon this change of heart, but never fear. There’s always the next time…
Esc-forfeit or bad connection? You be the judge. Unfortunately, I found myself a new home shortly thereafter on the smoking ruins of Khan’s new outpost. If he had been doing this for some time, I should thank him for all the new Federation colonies he presented me with.
VARIABLE VICTORY CONDITIONS IN CANADA WEST III
The Canada West II campaign is about wrapped up, thanks largely to the efforts of the Romulan and Hydran contingents. The Blue plague barely managed to keep up. However, the gigantic numbers of incompetant Federation frigate pilots on the server was always a contentious point with the enemy…
Percentages/Averages for July 24th to Aug 8th
posted 08-09-2001 08:32 PM
Fed: 35.48% – 12.46
Rom: 13.16% – 4.59
Lyr: 2.78% – .78
Hyd: 11.80% – 3.94
All: 62.83% – 21.77
Gor: 3.40% – 1.05
Kli: 19.84% – 7.18
ISC: 9.32% – 3.38
Mir: 4.59% – 1.68
Tot: 37.15% – 13.30
BBJones, here are the Numbers for up to now for the planning of your next campaign.
The Feds have large numerical advantages. THE FEDS ALSO MOSTLY SUCK. How can a race with such a consistent numerical advantage lose ground so quickly in the beginning of the campaign, requiring a bailout by their allies? Allies that did did far better with far fewer players, by the way. Yes, only manhours spent on the server really mean anything as far as victory goes… EXCEPT when you are trying to prevent a well-organized enemy from taking your homeworld (thus removing you from the victory totals altogether) when all you have are a bunch of newbies in frigates losing to the AI on Ambush the Enemy? A poll showing total prestige and glicko rating for each race might have been more useful than just player numbers.
BB Jones is planning to use variable victory conditions per race for the next campaign, based in part on the number of players and number of hours played per race. This would mean the Federation would be completely hopeless. They could barely compete with equivalent victory conditions. Thus I sent a little missive off to the server admin…
I really like the race specific conditions idea, however, please take a second to consider the real effects of the blue plague for the Feds. (Not even sure I want to fly them next time, but hey…)
Fed numerical superiority is a definite advantage, but far less of one than you’d think just by looking at numbers. The vast majority of Fed plague guys, especially in the later game when it starts getting really absurd, are newbies. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been drafted in the interior while trying to get to a front by someone who follows me around and keeps launching Ambush the Enemy or Scan over and over.
Having played through a bunch of these, I can also say with confidence that these players routinely LOSE to the AI in relatively simple missions. They also drafted the IAF like crazy, ignorant of the cross-empire draft bugs and such. And yes, it doesn’t take much skill to win a lot of Data Recoveries against the AI, but 60% more Fed players don’t matter when the enemy is trucking towards Earth right from the get go (as always happens) if they are helpless before actual players because that numerical advantage is made up of horrible players.
Conversley, players who don’t default to Fed tend not to be newbies, tend to be better organized, etc. I heard some complaining about Fed numbers being the key from some players who noted the fact that 4 extensive, reinforced Klingon border bases/planets were taken very quickly, stranding the Klingons in that area. That was not superior numbers… it was all ME. Even with pleas for help on the Fed boards, I typically get no support at all for rear area or deep space actions at all. One the area is taken and some bases set up, though, there are always some Fed who wind up making those areas their home, far from the line, as evidenced by the news events and the fact that occasionally the Feds in these areas will lose missions and flip them to Gorn when no Gorn are on the server.
At the least, I’d ask that variable victory conditions not be based on number of players alone, and that superior numbers count less for the difficulty of conditions. Looking at the numbers is not enough; if there was a way to count the total prestige of a race at any given time, it would make more sense. More than half of the Blue Plague, as far as I can tell, is made up of guys in Frigates and terrible Destroyers, with a glicko that sometimes makes me wonder if they are just lousy players or trying to use the Rotting Fur cheat.
Thanks for your time.
Thanks for the email. Those are some of the exact things that we are hoping to prove once and for all to show everyone what is really going on.
We are going to base our initial round of objectives on all of the data that we have at the moment.
The next round of objectives for each race will then be based on their accomplishments of their last objectives. This will take less and less into account the number of players for any race.
We will continue to adjust objectives throughout the campaign each round to try to always have as much balance as possible. The game should never ever be about superior numbers on-line and we think we have developed a way to nullify that advantage (or disadvantage in certain cases :).
Of course we want to see surges in player numbers when a race tries to meet a difficult objective, then perhaps a decline when things are slow. We think this new system will work out extremely well as the biggest bonus is that it will change all the time so we can adjust things to fit the current situation.
Of course there may come a time (as things are now on CWest) where one side is outnumberd 4 to 1 constantly. This would make it difficult to keep all those players busy. But we have contigency plans for that if it happens again.
Good points and we will keep them in our list of things to keep in mind while we develop the victory objective plans. Thanks!
If you happen to have a total prestige/glicko listing for the races and number of hours played, it would give you a better index as to exactly what caliber of player you were dealing with, and the victory conditions apropos to them. Course, you can also get high glicko and prestige through Data Recovery, but knowing more than a few Fed players who lose on Data Recovery, I can live with a prestige/glicko threat assessment.
BB Jones’ server is the most enjoyable one I’ve been on since the self-destruction of ArticFires. The next campaign, I will be hard-pressed to play Federation again, as this time we will be allied with the Mirak. Bean thinks this is a plot by BB to annoy people with the presence of Brezgonne in the Alliance that nobody plays Fed. I cannot really say this is outside the scope of possibility.