Planetarion Redesign
The following document is my Design ideas for where to take Planetarion under JageX. Its primary focus is to alter planetarion in the slightest way possible in order to make the game accessible for new players and also to reintroduce strategy in Planetarions gameplay mechanics.
Ive designed these idea's around not upsetting the current community while offering vast improvements to the gameplay of new players, casuals and experience players. So i'm primarily looking for feedback on weither you would disapporve of these changes and why. Design Document URL: https://sites.google.com/site/katies...edirects=0&d=1 (Download it instead of looking at it through google, for some reason it goes blurry after page 9 through googledocS) A summary of the changes are: Population is now a dyanmic figure and plays a central role in a planets development Players increase population through the living quarters construction Players are limited to the amount of population they can assign in each area by the constructions they have. ex. To add more population into research, you need the required research labs to put them in. HTC research is deleted, instead to mine asteroids you now have to put the population into mining for the amount of roids you want to mine (1 pop per roid). Population can be killed but bunker constructions can provide protection for them from attacks Research points and construction points are now done solely through population, the player chooses how much they want in each and which areas to specialise in. Research is now a tech tree with multiple options, offering choices and allowing the user to prioritise the sections they want. Galaxy research system implemented. Scan system is overhauled to give every planet basic scans, enough to play the game with but Advanced scans are still researchable and offer more information which experienced players will want (keep scanners viable) Signup page altered Protection is altered to be 12 ticks long but players can opt to stay in longer Shuffle system is overhauled and provides a much better way of spreading the actives around the universe while stopping one-time logins from ruining galaxys. Governments redeisgned to be changable Proper quests implemented to guide the new player. If you're going to comment, please give the design doc a skim through first as it probably explains the points the points you're asking about. Disclaimer: The design document contains the JageX logo but i am not from JageX nor pretending to be. Apparently JageX could sue me for offering suggestions! So here's the disclaimer, this design doc is not from JageX. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
Quote:
I still don't think your suggestion improves the system that much, mostly because of the heavy interlinking you have between branches. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Not much more to say, really. You know most of what I like and don't like about it. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Talked in pm with you about all of this. Agree with most of it. And nothing I really disagree with / would make me quit! So I spose thats good.
I would prefer removing the need for scanners alltogether though. And maybe as mz said the research could be in the alliance more than in the galaxy, or maybe both :o Overall I d like to see the changes done, or atleast have PA under jagex making some changes to a stale gameplay. :approve: |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
A lot of good ideas there. I like the added micromanagement bit, I think this is the kind of a direction the game really needs, a step more into managing your planet. The briefly mentioned "alliance research" for scan trees and such could be a good idea too.
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
Quote:
If we just did an alliance tax, then wouldnt it give the alliances with more players a much bigger advantage (especially if the researches were actually decent)? Forcing alliances to play at full tag even when they dont want to isnt really a good thing. It could be done through the alliance points system but i think it'd be better to see how that turns out before we implement major gameplay mechanics to it. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
In terms of "fairness", is it bluntly necessary for alliance abilities to be a function of alliance size? Maybe set some limits, but strictly giving larger alliances (by size) an advantage is both unnecessary and counterproductive. Quote:
Ie. You could invest from alliance resource pool into: 1. Science programs - increasing research output of member planets 2. Construction programs - increasing construction output of member planets 3. Alliance technology programs - putting in research for scans 4. War programs - say, increasing salvage amounts |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
A lot of these things are great, a few are not so great. This document shows addons that are all great, however; it does not show anything about things taht are currently already coded into the game. Such as restrictions on whom to defend and bugs in current quests and startup.
But to stick to the idea's and document -> looks all great! |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Nice suggestions Light :)
I hope we atleast can see some of them implemented ! :up: |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Great post Light, I think most/all of those changes would keep me interested in PA for a few more years
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
tons of good suggestions here ...
but will any of these ever be implemented ? and will jagex pay you for your effort ? .. they hardly have to think about anything now except new credit price when its finished :P |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Except new payment system when it's finished. Yeah.
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Mostly all good stuff there.
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
I would think a change to roids could be better 1) Renamed "moons" 2) HP increased x10 3) Output increased x10 4) You dont "capture" moons but occupy/colonise them. Gets around the "bringing them home" problem. So instead of people owning 3000 roids they would have 300 colonized moons. Could lead the way to land based combat... possibly... Rename the "universe->galaxy->sector" to "galaxy->solarsystem->planet" so you could have multiple galaxies at a later date. Change Governments for Leaders, this way you can hire and fire them at will. Leaders increase in effectiveness over time, but they cost more to fire the longer they are hired. Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
lol at the "difficulty" scale, is that driven by data or gut feeling?
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
b) You can max out in spending your resource, no need to swap around resources. c) Easier for new players to understand, I could walk around with my money all in change 1p,2p,etc or I could just use my credit card. Which I think is easier. Quote:
Quote:
But this also means that it would be good to have negative effects on your planet, for example increasing research (+20%) would decreasing construction (-20%). |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
In fact, I think that the whole government game mechanic (regardless of what we want to call it) is a bit pointless. It's just yet another way (on top of races and population) to boost a certain part of your planet in favour of another. Why do we need 3 different mechanisms for this? Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
I cant really comment on your other ideas, as i dont really see what problem they're solving and i always heavily disagree with the idea that nerfing something down to its simplest form is better for new players, when all it tends to do is make the game more boring and static which lacks diversity.
Especially as overhauling the asteroid mechanic is a major change as Asteroids as are one of the main defining features of Planetarion. It'd have to be an absolutly awesome idea which solves everything and causes no other problems in order to even be considered. Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
Obviously I would think that some races use more of a resource in a paticular ship type (more Crystal in EMP, more Eonium in cloak). But never above any of the other resources. What I would like to see is this in the resource breakup... Ter Ships - Ratio: 10/5/2 (17) Cat Ships - Ratio: 8/6/3 (17) Xan Ships - Ratio: 7/5/5 (17) Zik Ships - Ratio: 9/4/4 (17) Etd Ships - As above for each ship damage type. Ratio Key: M/C/E The stats can be varied to match the current cheaper "swarm" ships with less power (16 or 15). I also think that we should have the same M>C>E in the roid init. Population All other forms of resource spending could be removed in favour of population wages, so it only costs resource when using population. This could mean that as a player increases in size it also costs more to develop, if they use more pop. This would lead better to a single resource (aka currency as I do keep pushing it), but I suppose the current m/c/e could be used to do it. So instead of items having a cost, it would have a time taken, and the population wages would determin the cost. Including a small increase in wages the more population are used in an area means you can include more pop into an area but it will cost more and more. Spies Also recruiting from said population to be spies. This would need a change on the quantities I feel. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
Also as asteroids can clearly not be mined by a single miner (unless you give them very powerful mining tools) every mining crew should consist of 5 members. ofc these mining crews can be trained from your pop whereas you need 3 or 4 mining crews per roid. Or you could make it so that a mining crew consist of 15 or 20 pop which work in shifts without the planet ruler managing them. and then you'd need only 1 mining crew per roid. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
lol
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Thumbs up to all.
Plus I want ship stats redesigned as mentioned HERE But I'd like more than just 100 pop per residence (something like 100k would be more appropiate i think). Also a limit on how much % of your population can be assigned would be great. Having 100% of your entire population working for science would be unrealistic. So maybe we could take into consideration the hard coded limit we have at current pa. The only difference should be that assigning population no longer works just through sliders but as you mentioned through buildings |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
I would say that population structures be named "cities" or something like that. Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
Its because the current system just "adds" to values, it doesnt actually set the value. Everything starts at 100%, and your given the "added" bonus from the population with no real downside. I suppose I can see from the perspective that a scientist doesnt work for nothing, so perhaps we need farms that provide food for the population, so you can never have all your pop in one area. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
A player can choose what he wants to assign his population to, one player might decide to build research labs to get their population into research to rush something, another may decide to build more construction yards to increase there construction speed for more pop/refineries, another may just spam build living quarters as they're roiding alot. Whatever a player chooses to do, they're behind in the other area's. Players will tend to the majority of there population into mining if they have the roids but especially early on, someone who gets alot of roids and wants to mine them all will be sacrificing there research/construction speed. Quote:
Research labs highers the amount you can put into research etc. Quote:
Players can choose which area's they prioritise (or try to balance every area) but prioritising one area has a negative effect on the other area's. It allows more strategys to be developed within the population system with each strategy having its time in the round where its good but also stages where other strategys are better. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Can we please have a techtree that takes longer than the current one, most people do travel, hulls,HCT, and the rest once those 3 lines are finished.
Took me less than 500 ticks to get the major ones, and no doubt could be done faster. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
I'll aim to get my updated (non-rushed) design document out by next sunday where i'll have the tech-tree and go through multiple different strategys the population system allows (and the drawbacks) so you can see what i mean when i say a player will not put 100% of their population in anything although they can put the majority into an area, it will have significant impact on their game.
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
1 population in mining = 1 roid mined. 1 population in research = 1 research point per tick. 1 population in construction = 1 construction point per tick. 1 population in shipyards = 1 production point per tick. Security is abit different as it depends on your current construction level. The only section which requires more than 1 population to function, is the refineries due to them having more resources per tick than asteroids, they require more population. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
When population is actually used absolutely, instead of relatively, training people to become spies, guards, even pilots becomes a real option.
Truth be told though, I'm not quite sure if implementing that that would be a good idea. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Do you have any arguments for that?
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
But the concept is that while population grows over time, the player can use some of there population to do certain tasks.. Like if they wanted to send 10 spies on a covert-operations mission, they would lose 10 population. The problem is, i cant see what it would add to the game and other area's where the system could be implemented. My redesign thought, is about putting the foundations in place first before expanding on them. A dynamic population system paves the way for alot of different changes which could be implemented and it'll be important to implement the system before working on ways to improve it, as the changes would heavily depend on how the community uses it and what they're regarding as valuable. In my new redesign, ive changed covert-operations to try and make it more valuable to the average player and make it more useful in alliance warefare. So it'd be important to wait and see if players use it the way its intended and weither it requires any changes before adding population drawbacks into its use. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
This would only require 1 pop then, which isnt a huge loss. Once you start down the hiring from population, you can include things such as universities. To training spies, Leaders (advisors), miners, etc. But thats for PA 2.1. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
I just had a thought about mining roids.
1) Spaceport. You build these constructions (M/C/E sliders or something) which takes the usually 50 pop to fill each, and it works the same as 1 pop per roid. It slows down roidage, and I think would help new players understand limits to roid counts. 2) Structure costs. I would propose the cost to build constructions be either; a) Removed b) A Fixed amount of resource - This still means at the start it costs enough resource at the start to think about a strategy. Currently structure costs are nothing to players at a medium-high level, and only hinder new players. 3) Exponential Construction Time. In the place of structure costs, would be an exponential increase in build times (quick to learn, hard to master.. Mz). This also means top players must increase pop into structure building to keep up. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Or cons time could increase due to;
a)finding the space to build a con on the planet gets harder b) no more room on the home planet thus you have to build the construction on the 'moons' you capture. Although I guess this gets a bit complicated as then you would loose cons due to the enemy capturing and/or destroying the cons if he steals the moon from you. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Upgrading > Building anew.
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
what
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Population Death
Rather than just a random pop death formula, base it like this. 1) Any structure that's destroyed, has up to 20% of its workers killed (1 minimum, 20% max). 2) Bunkers have much more HP so should have less deaths. Another Roid Change Its possible to just have 1 single roid (not M/C/E), but use the "spaceports" idea to set the amounts you want to mine of each resource. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Light you are missing the most important parts.
PA is a game of roid swapping and there are no battles apart from some late round fleet catches. This need to change! The game needs to support people for landing on some losses (for example to make kills) without suffering self too much for the rest of the round. No one yet came up with a better suggestion than Attackers Salvage. Also the heat should be turned away from easy roiding to top gals, whom can also handle the incs a bit better without losing interest or focus of the game. Yet again some NFI (top ally) players had no incs after tick 200. Here I would still suggest fleet morals and turning xp in to some goods instead of just free score, which in the end do not courage landings so much. |
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Sorry, been busy with work the past few days but ive nearly finished my proper design document. Most the work is done, just got to finish the appendix and numbers now.
Quote:
Theirs now strategy in the amount of asteroids a player mines, Ive also altered the quest system slightly to highlight the population mining mechanic. Quote:
Im currently trying to find a balance where the player sometimes will have to save up for a construction and at the start of the game, resources are tight. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Planetarion Redesign
Quote:
Ive started to address the combat mechanics in my non-rushed design document and its now just trying to find a balance between defending and attacking, as no matter what i do.. ive got to keep defending possible, advantageous and maybe profitable, considering defending each other is the main driving force of socialisation in PA. The main problem im having though, is that no matter what i do.. if i force combat and ship loss without 100% salvage, then it becames a game of chance on weither or not the defending planet has moved their fleet or not. Im not doing anything to alter the 4am roiding at the moment except for some minor tweaks. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:07. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018