Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Forum index  > News   >

More Planetwars Testing

32 posts, 1334 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
Page of 2 (32 records)
sort



AUrankAdminGoogleFrog
5 months ago

With the Steam release fast approaching we have launched another test Planetwars to fix any lingering issues and ensure that it all works. For stability there are few new features however we have found the time to do some balance changes on the structures. The largest change is that victory points decay at 1/turn if at least two factions have VP, this is similar to the influence decay mechanic for planets.

It would be foolish to run Planetwars over the release as it is not the best place for brand new players and there are potential server load issues. We've been running these tests to let us run a full lore-and-all round shortly after the release. Exactly when will depend on circumstances.
+2 / -0



AUrankAdminGoogleFrog
5 months ago
Also, just for fun, we set the max influence of planets to 123. You still require 50% +0.1 IP to capture a planet. The removal of the hardcoded 100 IP needs testing in case we need to scale the effort required to take a single planet.
+0 / -0

CZrankpsaniac
5 months ago
Planetwars rigged! Battle between http://zero-k.info/Battles/Detail/496191 and http://zero-k.info/Battles/Detail/496192 wasn't even registered by the server.(And the server has no record of it and pretends it never happened, but planetwars attack cycle continued as normal.) It was a successful Federation attack on Colt.
+0 / -0



AUrankAdminAquanim
5 months ago
I'm pretty sure that was an unintended side effect of the maximum-IP update.
+0 / -0

DErankChrissi007
5 months ago
Have you thought about including the Planetwars map in the client? It is not relly necessary but it would be quite convenient.
+2 / -0



AUrankAdminGoogleFrog
5 months ago
Sorry about that. There was a server deployment, that I warned in #zk would occur after the current PW game had finished. I saw that another had started by then but I didn't want to keep putting it off.
+0 / -0

CZrankpsaniac
5 months ago
Is there even any reason to even get influence above 50.1%? It doesn't seem to make the planet more defensible and it doesn't improve the enemy IP decay rate.
+0 / -0



AUrankAdminGoogleFrog
5 months ago
Planets which are 100% controlled are immune to influence spreading through wormholes. That is about all regarding influence on neutral planets. On contested planets it is good to overkill a conquest to make the planet more difficult to take back. Also, you need to keep pumping influence in to counteract decay.
+0 / -0

CZrankpsaniac
5 months ago
Ok so here's what just happened: We attacked Zinc, won and captured the planet. Then I saw a button to defend Felix and clicked it. But in just that moment, the defend phase ended, so the button turned into attack Zinc. 2 seconds later the server realized that Zinc was ours. Then 3 seconds later before I could choose to attack another planet an ally joined.
+0 / -0


ILrankAdminhokomoko
5 months ago
Dynasty in this PW
[Spoiler]
+1 / -0

CZrankpsaniac
5 months ago
The mechanic of not showing the complete list of planets which you can attack is really unintuitive. Why do I have to open a browser, select a planet and click attack planet just to attack the planet I want?
+1 / -0



CZrankAdminLicho
5 months ago
The list might be too big .. 40 items .. but yeah we could make it list all.
+0 / -0



AUrankAdminAquanim
5 months ago
Some indication in the lobby that other planets are (or are not) available would probably suffice.
+0 / -0

CZrankpsaniac
5 months ago
Even if 40 planets are shown, its better then the current system. Or just show the galaxy map and show the planets you can invade there.
+0 / -0

CZrankpsaniac
5 months ago
(edited 5 months ago)

Is it intentional for wormhole rushing to be this OP? You can disable a wormhole in a battle, and then next phase the enemy can rush it and attack from that planet anyway.
+0 / -0

CZrankpsaniac
5 months ago
About economy: Please add these to the faction info list: Current energy consumption, dropship/bomber production per turn, energy demand with medium/high priority. Also energy demand includes powered off stuff, which it really shouldn't. Also, when you build stuff energy demand currently doesn't update until next turn.
+0 / -0



AUrankAdminGoogleFrog
5 months ago
Now that the round is over how about some feedback?
  • I agree that it would be great to display more economy information on the faction pages and tooltips.
  • Artefact activation seemed a bit expensive. Perhaps 750 or 800 activation cost would be a better value. This feedback is confounded by this round being 1v1 rather than FFA.
  • Wormholes could cost a lot more to rush activate since they can be rushed instantly.
  • The configurable max planet IP worked. How did the slightly higher number play? Would 120 be a good number?
  • Is the current attack signup system suitable for a larger round or do we need to wait for the new design to be implemented? https://github.com/ZeroK-RTS/Zero-K-Infrastructure/issues/2132

+0 / -0



CZrankAdminLicho
5 months ago
I think non-100 max IP is confusing.
+0 / -0

CZrankpsaniac
5 months ago
(edited 5 months ago)

The arifact costs seem fine to me. We could have turned them on and won, but we decided it would be more fun to conquer Throne instead.
Wormholes shouldn't be rushable instantly, since it makes destroying them in battles almost useless.
The higher max IP played well, it slowed down the game. It also made structures a lot less powerful. Dropships had to be used a lot more sparingly, I. Wormholes were noticably less effective. It made homeworls a lot harder to conquer though, which I think is a good thing. (with 123 IP you need 2 perfect battles with 50 dropships (35IP+50IP-25IP=60IP, not enough) to get a homeworld instead of 1)
You probably should have 100 IP for most planets, and more for some special planets.

The current attack signup system is really bad. It shows a shiny attack planet button on the top which nabs will inevitably press, attacking the wrong planet with the wrong people which screwes over the faction. There is also an issue that lots of people will see a defend button, lots will quickly click it and it will turn into a attack planet button which they didn't want to press and they will attack the wrong planet. Sounds unlikely, but it already happened to me.

The current system also makes nabs discouraged from playing.

I see the new system and it fixes most of the issues. I am kinda sceptical about the launch multiple invasions on 1 planet though. Do you really want to have 7 invasions at once on your homeworld? That makes defending it pointless. Without the ability to attack the same planet you can have bad players attacking some backwater planets and it will make them useful. Also, when defending if there are 7 invasions on your planet, you don't know where to put your good players-with one invasion per planet you can have an self-balancing system where pros get or defend the good planets and bad players get/defend the less important ones. This might actually lead to having balanced battles in PW.
+3 / -0



AUrankAdminGoogleFrog
5 months ago
Wormholes need to activate instantly to avoid the entire galaxy grinding to a halt when nobody has any active wormholes. Technically if everyone sells all their structures inefficiently to destroy all the metal and then disables all their wormholes this could still occur. It seems much less likely.
+0 / -0
Page of 2 (32 records)