)Would it be realistic and would it be desirable to start another game of Phoenix? I mean to start one from scratch. Limited (or even none!) affiliations, bare minimum of systems, Phoenix day 1....
Now first of all to clarify that I mean IN ADDITION to the current game. I'm not expecting, nor wanting, a reset or anything like that.
I just thought that like Quest has several concurrent, parallel games, perhaps there could be another Phoenix?
Why? Well there have been a steady trickle of complaints and comments about how hard it is for a new aff to start in the current game without some significant help either from the GM or from existing affs. If you start a new game this won't be the case (or won't be for a few years anyway). Also it's an added choice for players (old and new). Play in the current game with all its history, grudges, personalities and quirks, or play in a new game and help build a new history and become one of the personalities there. A blank canvas where you have as big a brush as everyone else. (Also, just about everything has been discovered and explored in the current game - or so it can seem sometimes, often I wonder how much more exciting it was back in the old days where every new resource found was a feeling of true pioneering.)
I appreciate that Phoenix is much bigger than Quest (geographically if you like as well as the database probably) and would not expect one of these to pop up every few months or even years. I wouldn't even suggest starting one now.
I thought it might be a good time to do this after the inflrastructure changes, and any other major updates planned. Move forward with the new changes into a new game.
I'm not even sure if I like the idea myself, but just wondered what people thought? Could this be a way to rescue some of those lost players? Those who can not find or see their place in the current game...
(Just a thought, and probably too complicated with turn uploads, Special Actions, etc., but just felt I had to suggest it.)
Whilst i think the idea has merits, Im not aware that Phoenix is in any trouble (player-wise)? I thought it was attracting lots of new blood?
Mark
| QUOTE (FLZPD @ Nov 20 2004, 03:14 PM) |
| Id be concerned about how it might devalue the existing game, as newer and newer Phoenix games are made |
I would probably worry about that too, but I wasn't thinking of lots, maybe one new one now, and then another in maybe another 10 years or so (if the second one works out
| QUOTE |
| it becomes seen as very old and attracts no new players killing it off. |
Possibly, but it's also a different game in many respects. Old and established, big power bases, lots of ships and outposts, almost anything you want or need available somewhere, versus new and unmoulded, everything is a challenge, not much help around...
Different appeal for different players.
Everybody plays by the same rules. Nobody is being treated unfair.
This game is all about affiliations, i.e. teams of players. New players are thought to join one of the established teams. The power of an affiliation is the product of its in-game resources times player wits, and not easily matched by single players in their mini-"affiliations".
If a player wants to start up a new affiliation then he is well advised to keep a low profile and gather a few friends and protectors around himself - and to avoid conflict. It will invariably take a couple of years before a new affiliation has grown to match established ones.
But it is possible, as affiliations wax and wane. At one time they may have dozens of dedicated players and thousands of ships and bases, six months later there might be two players left to run the whole affiliation, the fleets mothballed and most starbases reduced to outposts.
the 2nd game would also end up like the first, with people complaining that they got shot up etc etc, that one affiliation is stronger than another or has better resources, etc etc and so on.
there are all sorts of possible options in the game as it is and they havent all been explored.
there are also lots of positions in the current game begging for players, (not speaking out of turn here i hope) but for instance the BHD has several outposts that used to be starbases that could do with players, it is there for the running if players want to get involved.
I am also assuming the BHD isnt alone in wanting players, i know we would like more and are hopefully growing to satisfy the current player base within the IMP.
| QUOTE (Gandolph @ Nov 20 2004, 06:35 PM) |
| the 2nd game would also end up like the first |
Yeah, to be honest I think you're right.
It'd definately be an interesting microcosm of the current game, with lots of room for expansion later - it could even allow people to re-play what are now historical conflicts, such as the DTR/CNF splitting from the IMP, the FGZ invading all over again...
I would definately sign up to such a game, although as people say the perception might be that the current game of Phoenix is 'old' and therefore might lose players. Definately one for the chalk board in future, in my honest opinion.
| QUOTE (Ro'a-lith @ Nov 21 2004, 04:55 AM) |
| it could even allow people to re-play what are now historical conflicts, such as the DTR/CNF splitting from the IMP, the FGZ invading all over again... |
Boring!
How about if the Human Empire never split? What if say the DEN instead split into a rebel half? Half stayed with the ARC half escaped to oppose them with their HVE and FGZ allies... lol
But the twist being, that there is 1 GM starbase on each homeworld, representing the military of the homeworld and they sell basic tech items and in return buy ores, so that is why all begin to explore and setup outposts, no affs yet.
When people have the 1million, then they can setup an aff and then the game begins for real and no one have to feel cheated
so 1 yank system generally per race until later on, as the players become higher tech then their homworld.also i think the politicals could play a big role with the homeworld, if they could be part of a senate, that can influence what the homeworld will do and how to react, if someone else becomes a threat towards the homeworld etc.
Lots of fun possibilities i think.
I play lots of quest - and I'm all for getting the players to play in one game
(have gone from 4 to 2 mod games in last 3 years so nearly there).
The main reason I like one game is because it prevents the playerbase fragmenting and leads to more player interaction overall.
Also, with more games it means more NPCs etc for the GM to keep an eye on, which seems to either lead to higher prices, or else getting less value for money as the GMs time is stretched a bit thinner (if you only play in one game, then you don't really get any benefit from the time that the GM spends on the other game).
One game is better methinks, just to keep the players all together if nothing else.
Nothing wrong with this one...
Okay... maybe too short an answer...
Add to what we have first... 'fix' what needs 'fixing'.
The history and politics make this game interesting... I've been playing for a year - and I can see why it's difficult to set up on your own... but the attempting has gotta be fun - without a guarantee of success... there's no point in playing if success is guaranteed.
Where's the challenge in that?
GTDoug.
| QUOTE (gtdoug @ Nov 22 2004, 11:27 AM) |
| The history and politics make this game interesting... |
I don't disagree with you, I'm just suggesting it could be the opposite for some potential players (and even some exsiting players).
Unfortunately wherever they build there is always some established power slapping them about, even more so if they actually ever achieve something.
If only there was some region of space where a big power was not interfering; was not scared that a single starbase was going to overthrow them so should be ruthlessly put down as fast as possible; or leaned on to the point where there was no point in doing anything.
Basically is there interest for some sort of new region to the game that was not worth exploiting by the large affiliations?
It is easy enough to set up. Simply have a one-way jump link to a system with populated worlds that had very low merchandising.
Personally, I don’t think it is worth it, but I admit that I may be wrong. I would prefer affiliations to be less possessive, paranoid and draconian with respect to restricting their own regions of space against neutral factions.
| QUOTE (Mica Goldstone @ Nov 22 2004, 12:28 PM) |
| Simply have a one-way jump link to a system with populated worlds that had very low merchandising. |
And when the 'new' affiliations are powerful enough in their own minds to rejoin the game...?
Isn't this the virtually the same as the 'seeding' new affiliations in 'unexplored' space?
GTDoug.
This is a good option - essentially opens up a second game within the first, allowing people to make a name for themselves in the new area but limiting the impact from old established affiliations. I am fairly certain every aff would want a piece of the pie in the new area, at any rate. Definate thumbs up for this idea.
I cannot help but be reminded of the way the new Stargate series on Sky has been brought in, plotline wise, by a similar concept - a one way journey to a different galaxy with no chance of return.
In jest; Say, while we're at it... is there any way to create a one-way wormhole underneath the huge heavy hull fleets (Aka IMP block/CNF block/SMS block etc etc) floating around out there, and giving the rest of us a chance?
| QUOTE (Mica Goldstone @ Nov 22 2004, 01:28 PM) |
| Basically is there interest for some sort of new region to the game that was not worth exploiting by the large affiliations? It is easy enough to set up. Simply have a one-way jump link to a system with populated worlds that had very low merchandising. |
This was discussed some time ago I believe. Can't remember what the concensus opinion was then (probably wasn't one as usual
)If you were going to do this then you would have to guarentee that the link is one way and that at some later date someone was not going to be able to research a way out. A one-way wormhole (or black hole like Enigma-DPP) would probably be the best bet. That allows the main game systems to be over 4 jumps away from any of these "new frontier" systems.
I'd also suggest a size limit on ships being able to go through (limited by surface area) to keep growth slow. This will prevent big affs sending a ton of disposable XLight hull cargo vessels carrying vast quantities of cargo.
As for should it be done - can't see any reason why not. It would effectively be a game within a game and have minimal impact on the main game. It would allow people the option of a different environment, though I'm sure that every aff in the game would quickly have representation in the area.
Perhaps the system can be restricted as a training system only for Independants, where they could go and find unique trade goods and the like to sell in the Peripheries.
Perhaps only IND flag ships can enter the system and the AFFS agree not to send any ships in there.
If the system map and planetary maps were given out perhaps this would stop the need for the AFFs to send in ships to find out what's there.
I like the idea of low merchandising and low yields.
What about training scenarios which teaches the new players how to fly ships and run special actions - ie set responses which don't cost them anything. Only when they are ready to they get their exit visa.
Perhaps all new players should be seeded into ths system and be recrutied when they arrive in Yank.
What about as the test they need to find Rubis and get a password from the starbase description and then log onto the kjc site where their are profiles and recruitment letters from each of the AFFs. They can then pick the one they want to join.
Just some ideas anyway
Andy
Andy
Affs can enter, but failure to comply with system(s) law, would result in EEM and/or KAS sanctions. Given most aff wish to continue being able to trade in Yank, messing up with KAS could even result in expulsion.
As for PIR. Well, nothing an heavy KAS warship and platforms couldn't handle.
It would be the ideal training ground for new players. I always prefered recruiting rather than have players seeded into ones aff.
Also...not sure that you should cut off the long term possibility of relinking the system(periphery?) back to the main game as surely one reason for it would be to allow a new affiliation/IND position to build themselves up so that they can play a more significant role in the game in the longer term?
To stop the major affiliations from taking a leading role too easily perhaps entrance into the start system would be controlled by the EEM, and that they would place a cap on the number of hulls a single affiliation could send through? (I guess the risk being that there may be collusion with IND positions to get past the limit)
Alternatively, have a creche system where seed ships are started but a one-way link out. So once the player leaves, they cannot come back. It can be just like any other system except for merch restrictions and a ban on all shipbuilding and research complexes! Yes you could even create your political and extra ships.
When your ships leave, they can never return.
| QUOTE (Mica Goldstone @ Nov 22 2004, 04:59 PM) |
| Alternatively, have a creche system where seed ships are started but a one-way link out. So once the player leaves, they cannot come back. It can be just like any other system except for merch restrictions and a ban on all shipbuilding and research complexes! Yes you could even create your political and extra ships. When your ships leave, they can never return. |
I like the creche system much better..
On the other hand, I do think that seeding all new players in a different affl (like for instance NEW) would be also an oppertunity. You are not supposed to fire on NEW aff players, and they can basically go everywhere they want. When the player decides he likes the game, he can join a new affl or become IND. Rejoining NEW is ofcourse impossible, and adding ships or other positions to NEW players is also not possible.
With the NEW affl they can get an feel of the map and make contacts. And existing affls can talk with them, making active recruiting an possibility.
I like the idea of a system (or better an "area" which would be several systems, allowing players to discover new systems and everything else that involves). Not sure about allowing a link from the exiting systems (one way into the the new area). As it's been mentioned pretty quickly every aff will have a footing in there. And again, the bigger the aff the more easily they can afford to "lose" the ships to send lots of stuff through to seed a new power base, thus defeating the object. But I like the one way out idea.
I do very much like the idea of starting new players in this system (maybe an option for the startup form?) AND giving them a new flag.
I suppose the arguments against a NEW flag would be that it would disadvantage affs who are not as good at PR as other affs, but in the current system of seeding in random affs (while it may give a broad and generally balanced in take to affs) it makes recruiting somewhat less important and less interesting.
I for one would not try to "head hunt" players from other affs, new players or not, and I get the feeling most other "recruiters" feel the same way. Apart from the whole trust issue, I don't think it's very nice. Starting players without an aff makes it more important and exciting for the players to learn about the different affs and how they fit into each.
| QUOTE (Steve-Law @ Nov 22 2004, 06:23 PM) |
| But I like the one way out idea. |
The problem with one-way out unless it's possible at some time in the future to go both ways, otherwise you have the inviciable affilation problem.
Maybe working on some kind of tech like rip/sargasso would make sense?
| QUOTE |
| I suppose the arguments against a NEW flag would be that it would disadvantage affs who are not as good at PR as other affs, but in the current system of seeding in random affs (while it may give a broad and generally balanced in take to affs) it makes recruiting somewhat less important and less interesting. |
PR adds to the roleplay of the game, although you have the issue of what race to start players at then them being recruited into the new race/aff.
| QUOTE |
| Starting players without an aff makes it more important and exciting for the players to learn about the different affs and how they fit into each. |
Could just seed the players all as IND, would give a whole new, or rather old if my knowleage of bse is correct, spin on the IND marked ships.
People would think twice about attacking them.
So how about this?
Have a cluster of several new systems to seed in new players if they choose that option that are connected to the existing playing area,but has so many other empty systems between them and us that it would take at least 5 years minimum in research just to come into contact with each other!
If it's possible,we could have hundreds if not thousands of systems to explore(is that Mica I can hear groaning?)
and both groups may never come into contact,but it will still be the one and only game.The down side is that existing players won't be able to play in the new systems(the 2 aff senario again,let's not go down there again please)
New players can have the option of starting in the peripheries or in the Outer Colonies for want of a better term.
These new areas could be populated with all sorts of new aliens and/or lost human colonies.
lets leave it as it is
There is no way to do what you all want, all we can do is try to teach the newbies what they need to know and let them do things.
As I see them....
Pros
- Fresh Start
- Land Grab (old gold rush days)
- Nobody in particular is better than the other
Cons
- No history
- May cause current membes to give-up on this game
- Work by Phoenix personnel
- Some may try playing in both and give less than 100% to either
Ive played in a number of games that starting a second spoke the death roll for the first. Phoenix does have some short-comings, but face it, any system that is developing as Phoenix has will have this tendency.
The best thing I hope for here is that we contiune to look at the gaming system, improving upon it as we go. Look at the difference between BSE and even the 1st year Phoenix.
Final thought.... Nope. Don't need a second one.
Lllywelyn
| QUOTE (Mica Goldstone @ Nov 22 2004, 01:28 PM) |
| I would prefer affiliations to be less possessive, paranoid and draconian with respect to restricting their own regions of space against neutral factions. |
As seems to be the general opinion so far, I definitely feel that starting a second game of Phoenix would be a bad idea.
Personally, I couldn't agree more with the above quote from Mica.
Richard
AFT
One of the things we discussed was open up all our systems (=the whole Cluster). Let everybody do as they wish as long as they don't bother the Clans. The Clans would always get first call on any new deposit of unique stuff and rare ores found on a planet, as well as we could forbid others from colonising planets already colonised by the Clans. The Clans would fight to keep all systems claims and would eagerly participate to defend non-Clan positions attacked in their space.
Perhaps something to consider here? I.e. not like Yank as the affiliation would be player controlled, perhaps own several systems, and have their own objectives. But they would help defend all positions attacked in their systems (would help protect the INDs who set up there) and allow them to do pretty much as they wished as long as they didn't mess with Clan positions and interests.
| QUOTE (Mica Goldstone @ Nov 22 2004, 09:59 AM) |
| Alternatively, have a creche system where seed ships are started but a one-way link out. So once the player leaves, they cannot come back. It can be just like any other system except for merch restrictions and a ban on all shipbuilding and research complexes! Yes you could even create your political and extra ships. When your ships leave, they can never return. |
Although I like the creche system concept, there are a few things that I have misgivings about. Foremost is the complete invulnerability afforded to a Political position in this system. What good are Assassins if everyone keeps their Political safely locked up in a system that is totally isolated from the rest of the peripheries?
The bans on research and shipbuilding also seem like artificially imposed constraints - especially considering the number of new ships showing up in the system...
I dunno - perhaps the system could generate huge bursts of Temporal/Sub-Space Energy that would interfere with the communications necessary to command positions outside the system (and make it impossible to get a "lock" on the system from the outside) - this would make it necessary to take your Political with you when you did finally decide to leave the safety of "the Nest" and would necessitate having an exit point in a truly Neutral System (such as Yank) to avoid having the new ships (with their political cargos) poached.
Just my 2p
Cheers,
Rich Fanning
aka
Lord Lawrence Scrimm
CIA Intelligence Director
- a new player could be asked if they want to try out a practice area -
they can get a single ship and / or GP to just trash how they like, and experiment with different movement orders.
This can be at the same time as the current set up, but while they're looking at different affs etc then they have a way of moving around and experimenting without getting their aff in trouble for going somewhere they shouldn't etc (so long as they're careful with their *real* start up?
A bit like quest world 19 is a training area with no charges for the first 20 turns so a new player can see what the game's like before spending any money.
Briefly spoke to Mica about it, the Training Grounds and training missions are already being designed by me and I hope to present the full data to Mica/David before the end of December. Unless they find a hair in the soup we will get new players to start in the Training Grounds with an option to graduate into the "real" game and join an affiliation at any time.