Jump to content

jaana

Members
  • Content Count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About jaana

  • Rank
    Level 1
  1. I didn't request a new map. It's great if you want to develop one but there's no reason to have to wait for it to have a map change. It doesn't take weeks to put up an old map.
  2. If the map isn't changing, what is the reason? 1. No map change because I don't have the time to do it. 2. No map change because I think using this map is more beneficial to the zone. When there's no response, I feel like it's 1. Running a zone in silence doesn't work. If the reason is 2, we need to hear you say that.
  3. You need to switch it up. --> 6 wks of powder room map --> 6 wks of barking frog, droid map --> 6 wks of... please put ALL (this includes all submitted SWZ maps that have been used once or never used at all) SWZ maps on file in subarenas and post the subarena names in so we can go from there Don't forget to increase green and flag spawn radius for these maps since they have larger center areas. Please increase antiwarp radius to radar size AS IT ONCE WAS. It's supposed to be a challenge to win - its not a challenge if it is so easy to warp away from within a base. Please fix the bot so caps can be set when they come into play.
  4. Basically, it's what happens when the person in charge is quite clueless as to what constitutes fun in the game because he doesn't play the game. We just have a puppet for a sysop. Puppets don't have a vision of their own. They get pulled this way and that, and are in general quite confused. It's an uphill battle to try to get things done right. A swz sysop should be foremost an swz gamer, and a tiny bit swz socialite. Our swz sysop is a swz socialite. It's not a difficult concept: A swz socialite is going to sit there chatting. A swz gamer, on the other hand, would sit there analyzing how setting changes have affected gameplay and would be very reactive to negative impacts. A swz gamer would hate to see gameplay quality go downhill while a swz socialite would not even notice that gameplay quality has gone downhill. The first clue to him is the decrease in population. Some of the settiing flaws are so obvious it is ridiculous. For example, isnt it obvious that the greens and flags should not be densely clustered in the center?
  5. yes, remove 1-flag carrying/no resetting. and make it public not privates (privates have been hurting the zone for a very long time now). little ships are worth trying for a little longer though I don't see them working. What is hurting the zone is: Bad experiments turned permanant. It is because people in charge of settings do not play the game and/or do not analyze their effects on game quality.
  6. jaana

    settings

    You are referring to the case of the "altruistic" flagger who artificially extends the game for the sake of not ending the game. The game becomes bland and noncompetitive because the unofficial etiquette is that it is more acceptable to pass flags back and forth than to win the game. There is nothing exciting about this. But we all remember people used to play the game the way it should be played. The competition to win was not always contrived. The question to ask is why they stopped playing, and why they stopped putting flags in bases. Reasons include: - The map would be unchanged for 6 months+ and it didn't matter how excellent the map was, it was just too boring when you've played in the same map for that long. - The map does eventually get changed but some maps were just not as good as others. For example, the black and white one, the one with the very thick walls. The decrease in population was used as justification for changes. - The change to private frequencies. It has been private frequencies for a very long time now. - The change of antiwarp role to ships that cannot effectively antiwarp, and the reduction of antiwarp range. These changes have made it easier for enemies to base hop. Also some of the later maps we've had had bases that were so large it was very easy to get out of antiwarp range. You don't have a good game when you can't antiwarp a couple of reds that are in a base with reasonable resources (e.g. one antiwarper). It was neglect that brought the population down, then changes that hurt the zone some more. We have excellent settings buried beneath all these changes that have hurt the zone (e.g. priv freq, antiwarp role). But now some more settings have been introduced: 1 flag carry limit, low timer settings. I think these new settings give the games a watered-down feel: 1) There is nothing exciting about getting into an enemy flagroom that has many flags. This is because you can only pick up one flag. There used to be strategy. You used to make a decision based on split-second evaluations: - I wonder if they have antiwarp on? - what are the odds I can get out with flags? - Should I pick up flags? All of them or diversify? - Should I attempt to double kill? Now, when there are many flags to be picked up, it is a bland process of everyone picking up flags and half-heartedly trying to survive. A flagholder's survival used to be more important than it is now. Whole teams used to help a flagholder get out, thor guard, or help him survive after warping out. 2) It is uninteresting to hold a flag when fighting in a flagroom. It is as if once you pick up a flag, it becomes debateable whether you are actually helping your team out when you kill a red. After all, if you kill that enemy that flag will yellow to the center. You and your team should receive a direct benefit from killing the enemy, not a questionable one. 3) There is little hope of overturning a flag game once one team has all the flags. This is because timer cannot be reset and flag time is so low. This leaves attackers who put in an effort feeling cheated. No doubt they will adapt to these negative feelings and learn not to try anymore. That being said, the new settings have a couple of things going for it. One is its introduction was accompanied by a sorely needed map change. The other is it negates some of the effects of these antiwarp settings because base hopping is not really a problem anymore. I have no problem trying things out. In fact, I think it takes too long to try things out sometimes. It takes too long for a change (such as a map change, or switch between public and private freqs) to happen. Then when something is finally "tried out", there is the tendency for it to be just "left in"- the same kind of tendency to just leave the same map in for months and months, or leave it private frequencies for months and months (.. over a year??) and ignore that it hurts the population or it is not fair to not take turns and at least have public frequency days. I am not saying a new map has to be made every month, but we have several that can be rotated in and out. Or promise the public that submitted maps that were custom made for the zone and look like there was effort put in them will be put in for at least a week. Back to my point. We already have excellent settings that work for the zone. It is wrong to implement some settings that hurt the zone, then use that as justification for arbitrary changes that make the game bland and will only hurt the zone some more if left in.
  7. jaana

    settings

    The original settings were excellent. The changes to them have hurt the zone. Most notable of these are: the change to private freqs and the transfer of antiwarp role to ships that cannot effectively antiwarp. The zone was "broken" by some bad changes. The fix is to undo these changes, not to introduce more changes and then say how they might work *if*.. If what? Make ten more changes and make new maps? There is no need to go to all that trouble. We already have settings that work. It's just been a very long time since we've seen them.
  8. jaana

    settings

    Three changes I think would help the zone. The zone needs some original settings back. 1. 2 public freqs with no limit to each freq. Public freqs can generate population the way private freqs cannot because it leaves no one teamless, creates 2 teams with the same number of members, and can result in intense 20+ vs 20+ games. Private freq proponents have had their way awhile- take turns. Have capital ships enabled at 14 vs 14 and let them have blue bullets. 2. Antiwarp needs to be put back on spider and weasel. I believe they were put on javelin and leviathan because the rebels with the weasel had a faster antiwarp ship than the imperials with the spider. This is no longer an issue. Javelin and leviathan are too slow and defenseless (no speed, no cloak) to follow flaggers and keep within anti range. They are just not effective anti ships. Also, increase anti range back to just about full radar. There would probably be no negative effects to letting all four ships have antiwarp. 3. Back to 15 flags, no carry limit, 199sec resettable flag timer. 9 flags, 1 flag carry limit, 120s nonresettable flag timer eliminates certain intense elements that used to be found in a flag game. These include: 1) sufficient time to coordinate an effort to thor a flag holder, 2) time to break into an enemy base or break in far enough to frighten a flag holder into killing and resetting their timer, 3) the fear of a thor and use of thor guards that weaken the defense. A flag holder killing a flag holder should get all the flags- they shouldn't go to center.
×
×
  • Create New...