So I took a homeworld

Five hours and a half ago I took an inactive’s homeworld.

It had the T3 gun, 16500 soldiers, and homeguards for 330ish K pop. Race being Ripchee their combat value was multiplied by 1.1. I sent 130k Syntis soldiers (combat value x1.5), 100k were instantly killed by the orbital gun, only 13k survived the whole battle. (When I checked with 100k soldiers the odds were labelled “moderate chance of winning”, with 130k it increased to “high”, that’s when I decided to launch the invasion).

What surprised me was the remaining buildings still there after the battle : It seems only a T3 city was destroyed. This means the T3 gun is now mine - something that no one can build! Of course all buildings being labelled as Ripchee I cannot upgrade them, but I can dismantle them to replace them. Oh and I also got the shipyard, 11 barracks, 12 farms, 4 T3 cities and rest as usual.

Given that this world was perfect for Ripchee and had lots of unemployment, I then took another approach in it’s devellopment : buiding like a meatbag, ie : +happiness buildings to be able to tax 100%. Revenue at 100% = 949 credits per hour, in one day it will be become the planet generating the most credits in my whole empire. To understand that meatbags can devellop this way from day 1 is, well, oh crap they must make so much money! :smiley:

With the T3 gun, two pops I’ll push to the limits and a bit more barracks (50?), two to four times the max pop of my own homeworld (one pop only, 6000km, bleh!) it is objectively now the best planet I own, way better than the 44 others (has some good % materials too), and the easiest to defend when finished.

And there comes a question I really have to ask : “Da fck is this sht : starting positions for players being SO different in value in a very competitive game, are they completly nuts?”.

When the next server is launched, do we really have to chain reset until we get a good starting set in order to avoid being an objectively complete idiot settling in Craptown, the kind of guy that likes being chain butchered by anyone with half a brain? Yeah, I’m talking about me, my homeworld was 6300km, best % being 61, it’s only a big huge barrack now, can’t use it for anything else…

Yes, homeworlds should not be perfect planets because we should fight to get control of those. But I scouted several homeworlds now, and you know what? Small, huge, max 61%, max 99%, it’s sooooo random!

  • “Lets play a game!”
  • “Okay : I get a Ferrari, you get a horse wagon”

This will have to be fixed. And BEFORE any live action, before even an open beta, because a game lives and dies by it’s community and this game being strategic it would be burned on a pyre very fast on reddit and everywhere else, the month of going live is critical and that thing is like french kissing a loaded shotgun.

I think I understand how it came to this : it seems starting positions were calculated by system, not by planet, however the rule now is a limit of planets, not systems, so this algorythm has to be adapted. If this is true and they don’t want to work on making again the spawning algorythm, there is a fix that can de used : any planet in a player’s homeworld doesn’t count for max planets (synth) nor generates corruption. As long as they can say “you all get a similar starting strenght”, players will accept it, even if those starts are different, as long as they can trust that it is fair :wink:

4 Likes

Yes we can all have this if we prepare for it. But watch out, in late game that planet won’t be so easy to take. You can make them impossible to take and the best an opponent can do is occupy it.

See the topic regarding Seed Ships. That’s the proposal to replace the need to reset.

Agreed, it is better than the start of A3, but still not as decent or consistent as it should be.
Se A3 discussion topic on this.

Agreed also a post exists on this.

Great write up overall, I think it would be helpful to review existing feedback on these various topics and add your observations and feedback to them as well.

Well, Puma, you are telling me that the game - which is in under construction - has not known any improvements on the topic of resetting since March 2018 : If this topic on seed ships is still valid, that’s what it means. Do you understand now why community managers avoid necroing? :smiley:

Also, I do not care about seed ships, I care about starting conditions equality for players, being forced to reset to avoid a crappy start is not a solution : it’s a problem.

A crappy homeworld cannot be defended properly. Do I really have to do the math about what’s the max force the attacker can bring and what’s the max force the defender can put on a tiny planet? No : I don’t. Because being able to avoid all assault requires things on a planet, that require workforce, that require pop, that require living space, derived from km’s of the planet. Does it require 3.000km to be able to be invulnerable or 10.000km? In fact it doesn’t matter : a 15.000km is always better in both cases, more usefull space.

Why should I search for A3 discussions on topics? Well, I did, I found " Starting planet size" February 4th, wich ends with :

[q]
mel

Feb 5

Hello,
We know about current situation with starting planets and systems. They will be rebalanced a little bit later to create more equal conditions for newcomers. Thank you
[/q]

You don’t necro such a thread. You just don’t. That would be disrespectfull for the Mel guy and the devs, like saying “you did nothing, you didn’t work”. I do not know what they did, I just point out that it is still not good.

I really dislike necroing, and the larger a community becomes the sooner necroing begins. 10 peeps might talk about the same thing for one year on the same thread, with 10.000 whatever is on page 2 is doomed.

However I started this sthread as “Hey, First!” (I’m not even sure but no one claimed a HW conquest before) and went to a technical issue about starting conditions, so this thread should be moved to “feedback”, admins, please :wink:

I do think it makes sense to standardize homeworlds, if not entire home systems.

On the other hand, luck is always going to be about 90% of your gameplay anyway. You might give everyone fair starts and still some people will be “lucky” in how nearby systems are arranged or some people get lucky because their neighbors played for 3 days and then quit, giving them a bunch of free perfect homeworlds to conquer later, while YOUR neighbors were all super aggressive try-hards and you’re stuck in a war while everyone else in the galaxy is expanding willy-nilly.

So… I dunno. Standardizing home worlds seems like a good idea but I’m really not sure how much it matters. In a way, the mistake is even trying to make a game like this directly competitive. Single player 4X games are really about taking your lumps and finding out the best way to roll with them. Trying to translate that into a directly competitive “fair” game, as if this was a round of Starcraft, is never going to work. Even if you account for all the game variables, you can’t account for your neighbors.

Maybe the real answer is to standardize homeworlds but make them all equally mediocre.

2 Likes

I took over an inactive home world on about day 3-4, but it was actually much worse than my starting system. Still, the infrastructure is so worth it.
You can keep the ‘first’ claim though because I didn’t have to invade. Apparently just about the only thing the player did was stand down their defence. Wow

Here @Arn is a recent suggestion

And I guess you didn’t read my response now did you, you appear to be quite a rude person, and I’ve never had the pleasure of a pleasant conversation with you. Do the research yourself.

And I’m sure you know if you have played, that you CAN travel anywhere, find a planet and resettle. I have done that often in this game. The only thing I lose is T3 orbital.

Okay…

Puma : I do not understand why you put a new suggestion in a dead thread : you don’t have to dig up a year old thread, you expose the idea and also summarize what other usefull details were added to it. Here if I try to ask something specific to a guy talking one year ago, well, is this guy even still there? You can perfectly put a link to the old thread for others to see details, as reference (and politness if the idea wasn’t yours at first).

Yes, I dislike necroing, like many people, that’s because I’m old school (I was on Ultima Online day 1).

Wowowowo, I didn’t read your response, I’m rude, etc… Hey : I was talking about starting conditions and talked about resetting only as a bad method to avoid crap starts, that’s not my subject, that’s why I didn’t follow you on your proposal for a better resetting method (which might work btw) : if I want bananas I don’t want apples. No offense intended, it’s just that it’s two different subjects.

You have relocated often in this game, during previous alphas. Okay, but me I’ve been playing several games somewhat of the same kind and I know what happens when you have people who payed good money butchered here and there because they didn’t realise they are not in candyland anymore. They become a bit nervous. If the game has any flaw it will trigger them.

And a flaw in starting conditions as big as the one we can currently see, well it’s like living on a volcano.

When a game is live it’s really, really, not like a beta. Beyond Protocol was based on a “battle royal” scenario : many people spawned at a location and only one individual or group survived, all the others were killed and respawned somewhere else for round two, then three, until everyone had a place. Mankind? Well you had to flee the starting system because you could fight in those (ah, the sound of newbie tanks destroying another player’s mines on a ressource you want, one hour after starting…).

I’m all in for brutal starts, been there, I like them.

Randomness? Yes, sure, fine. But if at the very first second of gameplay I get a club and the guy in front has a machine gun, you can kiss my money goodbye, no way I’ll get into this kind of crap.

If an issue hasn’t been resolved, but the discussion that occurred originally was useful in the current environment, why rehash the entire topic and start from scratch all over again. It is useful if the issue has been addressed and the changes aren’t complete yet. That is why.

All it does is waste our time saying the same thing 15 times in 15 different places.

2 Likes

This is only the illusion. And the trap. The trap is to think like this than do reset and lose presious time. And as for me. I like it. Because a baka who do reset just because of such a small matter desirves it. This is a strategy game. If u have no brains it’s only natural to suffer here.

The current reality of early game is such where ur early development don’t depend on starting homeworld, but on good planets with good natives near u and number of other skillfull players. HW size and density of it’s resourse is nothing compare to this at this version of game. That a concrete. Those who don’t argee with this point are all a mere bakas.
Before the mid or late game comes where this homeworld planets became truly valuable u already can reach the point where u can take a few much better hw from others.

1 Like

Completely agree with this. Though advise newer readers not to take the saltiness too personally!

The problem is where our gallant DEVs were trying to determine if the game was user (Newbie) friendly yet. It is not yet!

As Pepe points out once you have the trick of the game you can make even a bad starting position work for you as the homeworlds in the early stage is not half as important as grabbing the best of your local cluster before somebody else does!

BUT… as you have to know this as you start new players may get left behind thinking its better to reset/reroll than make the best of what the spawning algorithm has thrown you.

So while it would be a lot duller than it is now, having blank slate homeworld that are medium good to average for your race would make it a touch easier on brand new players (Provided they could be made to understand we all in that case start level). It wont change the fact that getting out and grabbing the best planets you can find on Day one give you the best chance of success later on.

2 Likes

Well Pepelekus : this current pre-beta start cannot be taken as a regular one, because many people launched the game and left immediatly, leaving us inactive homeworlds but more important : empty space to expand into. I have a large territory, I have a lot of inactives in it, with a regular start where no one goes inactive, fighting would have been fierce : I see how close we were to each other.

If someone accepts a shitworld as his homeworld, he is a complete moron. Too bad we can’t have “dueling” servers, it would be so easy to prove it…

The important things are what natives are near you, etc? Yes it’s important. But irrelevant if you are doomed to lose the war for controlling those systems. Your homeworld is your safespot : no one will attack it before several weeks. Thats is critical stuff. It’s initial value is HUGE, just count the credits and materials the buildings are. Oh and the pop, the pop! And perfect for growing.

You colonised that native one hour before me? I’ll invade with troops. You get more to defend? I invade another of your colonies, our fleets keep playing cat and mouse because as soon as one is reinforced with a new ship the other avoids a fight he’ll lose. Planets don’t move. troops are invaluable, barracks are invaluable, you have a shitHW and have to build barracks on one of your colonies in order to keep up with my troop production that I get in my safe/carebear/hugeHW? GG - You lost.

It’s easy to crush newbies, it’s easy to crush carebears, it’s easy to crush casuals, but when the guy in front of you - and let’s say three fronts, because that would have been my situation from what I saw - is a powergamer like you…

Enought fanboyism please. What I say is that this system cannot be used like that when the game is opened to the public, because a shitstorm would happen. It can be used for several other server resets in closed beta, it’s not N°1 priority on the to-do list, bug fixing is, mechanics testing is. Betas are betas.

The moment a game starts to open is very critical. The first reviews will come and nowadays gamers don’t even trust reviews anymore, they go to forums, and not the game’s forums (too many shitgames made theirs censorship land) but reddit and whatever else. Strategy games players are more difficult to handle than other types (rpgs, etc…) because they are more used to use their brains.

We arn’t even 10 in this thread, can you imagine what would happen if we were 1.000?

This game has more potential than both Mankind and Beyond Protocol, I see that. It can easily get more players and keep them longer. It can explore several gameplay experiences because of flexibility in server’s rules - that alone is HUGE! Just moving away from the “one server” rule was a genious’ play.

Just keep in mind to fix the starting conditions problem before opening.

Oh and also : me saying “Okay, there is a problem here” and others saying “there is no problem”, that is crap. We should be talking about “well, how to do it better”?

1 Like

hmmmm

Very true, this is why certain aspects of invasions should be placed higher on the tech tree. It is much too easy now to invade early in game if your specific start is somewhat more advanced than your neighbor.

With the above noted exceptions I agree with most of what you said, though I wish it would be written a little more succulently and with substantiation, along with solutions to resolve the issues you point out.

Arn, U tell all of these to most active skirmish player. In skirmish in my starting area there where only one inactive player. And planty of active. Most of them chose to ignore scouting and diplomacy. One my neigbour was the best and reaches agrement with me. Do u wish to know what happens with others who bets on “so-called” safe homeworld? I’d place minefields on their homesystems and assault all other planets to cripple their development and after I get nessesary techs withing short week than just wiped them out completly. That was very easy to do and was just secondary task in my development to control area and don’t allow anyone to mine asteroids. Tech advantage is a great thing here. Homeplanet is not even near as safe as u imagine. And these game is not a casual farmville but a hardcore game where player can lost (almost) everything in fast and simple manner.

1 Like

Very true in early game. Late game it depends on how well you are prepared.

1 Like

Which raises a good point about why homeworlds should really be mediocre at best: the obvious abuse would be to make multiple accounts, hope some start near each other and simply stand down the defense on the ones nearby. Your “real account” rolls in and takes them.

This would be much less worthwhile if homeworlds were intentionally made to be below average worlds.

Just as an FYI, the ONLY thing that makes a Homeworld unique is the T3 orbital defense. i personally would prefer this to be an expensive and high level tech available to anyone, anywhere. But on a mediocre homeworld, it would be useless anyways and just a source for some quick credits by dismantling it. A T1 SY and scanner is nothing to build once you have the beron to build them…

Could tie the tier three orbital to what makes a homeworld a capital planet. Tear it down at the original homeworld and one can be rebuilt at a new location that becomes the new capital planet.

1 Like

There’s also been discussion regarding having system generated minefields that are stronger than the ones you can lay with a ship. Could tie that also to a T3 Orbital Defense system.

2 Likes