Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

Warning To Develeoper And The Future Of Multiplayer!

Discussion in 'Multiplayer' started by Bopkasen, Apr 5, 2014.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. LongBongSilver Trainee Engineer

    Why don't you just make a giant metal butt in space? If they see that, a good troll will think "These guys aren't super serial enough to get mad" and leave. If they destroy it, the joke's on them because they touched a space butt and that means they get like space cooties.
  2. xlodx Trainee Engineer

    Hello Restoon,

    thank you for your posts in this topic, I think you nailed a core problem in SE pvp multi player very precise.

    I read in some other topic a suggestion about implementing different sectors (like the game maps we already have) connected by some type of warp engine device. In this scenario one could have a fraction owned "home sector". Battle could be fought in the other sectors. What is your opinion about this suggestion in order to solve the problem?
  3. Restoon Trainee Engineer

    This one of few ways to solve a problem. There is many details, such as how players can find other "sector", belonging to other player? Server list is not best idea. Nav beacons on far borders of private sector looks better, but which must be shown for current player? Friends? Okay, friends. What to do with foes? They won't give you their coordinates freely. In most cases, travel to non-friend sector will be not possible, and I can not say it is bad. There may be another place to meet and fight.

    Public servers (developers must start and support them) may be shown anytime, while online, but there must be some restriction by cubes count one time on server, so one server mark must be used for many servers of same world (if 100 players want fly to one server, 50 of them have 500m length ships - it be no good placing them on one server). For example, devs start server of "Vega sector". There is many Uranium, so people want get there, many people. Server let enter to 5 people with rational-sized ships, but then coming Star Wars fan with his Imperial Star Destroyer in natural size. Server let he in, but next players can't get to this copy of "Vega sector" server. Developers must now create (automatically) new, empty copy of "Vega sector", where new players may enter. This solution has good sides (many people can play comfortable), but there is weak sides (it may be hard to get to the same public server with your friend, who enter earlier).

    "Open world" idea is most popular among players, but it is also most difficult to code, and even more difficult to balance. Right now can't tell any word about it's possibility in SE.

    Private and public sectors system may work better, if in private sectors is noticeable shortage of resources. Otherwise there is no good reason to go at public server, if not to fight. In online-game PvP categories, without reason to visit public servers they are useless, because not provide any intensive gameplay. In sandbox categories I can't tell right now good or bad - just haven't example on hands.
  4. Evis Apprentice Engineer

    I like the idea of sectors, and being able to visit other sectors on other servers in a semi-seamless manner.

    Providing there's no mod use, you could probably produce a block or gate (our invisible boundary) that would create an instance of your ship on the other server, and send you there.

    Alternatively, and probably for the best, allow server admins to connect their sector groups with other server groups; this way you create networks of communities than can visit, trade, and fight each other.

    Guess we have to see how the server-wide sector system would work or be considered before we think about how such a thing would work.
  5. Hornet Trainee Engineer

    Ways to stop griefing.

    1) Uninstall game.
    2) Play with friends only.
    3) Turn Weapons off.
    4) Host your own server so you can kick people.
    *5) Build a giant space butt
    wow much research went into this.
  6. LongBongSilver Trainee Engineer

    5) Build a giant space butt
  7. DJB Systems Trainee Engineer

    It's hard to stop the griefers without completely policing the game.

    You could make a grief-proof game mode. All blocks are indestructible, no weapons, unmanned ships auto activate inertial dampeners when unmanned, no colour changing blocks. No copy pasting.

    But then it would be boring and stale, I find that by simply naming your server something that resembles whats gong on inside instead of "Easy Start 2" the amount of griefers I encounter lessens.

    Furthermore, I can usually identify and kick a griefer before they can do anything truly awful, they're all the same, they usually spawn and sneak off to build the 'missile cube' or something equally rubbish.

    I also never forget a name, because I write down the name of everyone that I kick.
  8. ozarkamax Junior Engineer

    just password your servers or make them friends only and advertise. done. they will have better control when they release dedicated servers. just stop making your servers public.
  9. Morrigi Apprentice Engineer

    All blocks are indestructible?

    Well, I could always surround your base with a vast space butt armada.
  10. ozarkamax Junior Engineer

    hourly backups. done.
  11. Morbophobie Apprentice Engineer

    I don´t like sectors with different abilitys simply because this mechanic would be unrealistic. But I agree that multiplayer should be designed in a way that prevents griefing, so that the admin do not have to care about.

    There are some possibilites to prevent griefing:

    1. Automatic defence which is already on the way (turrets and programming)

    2. No yellow kamikaze ship simply force the griefer to invest some time into his bullet. And if he invest time he can loose the invested time. So he has to consider if it is worth the effort

    3. Larger Maps Larger Maps mean it is easier to hide something from destruction. And even with these small maps player lose sometimes their station. So it will be easy to hide somethin in a bigger map.

    4. MMO Well this is the most complex thing. Why would an MMO prevent griefing? Well an MMO means massive amounts of players which means larger fractions. If the fractions get so big, that always someone is online the goods of the fraction are protected. If the goods are protected players think twice if they want to attack, because they have to invest time to be able to do some damage. And if they have to invest time they want their attack to pay out. So raids become rarer. If raids become rarer the fractions have more time to build defence systems, what leads to rarer attacks because of the good defences. Besides Fractions will be able to install automated production lines and will be able to protect them. Automated production lines mean that you can build things faster than individuals. Preventing individuals from attacking you because they won´t be able to overcome your defence. Other fractions could attack you because they could run production lines too. But the production lines not only make you stronger they are also a weak point you have to defence. So it is a risk for fractions to attack each other - they could loose their production lines. So deterrence will ensure peace with other fractions and a defence system will destroy individuals before they can do damage serious damage. And if individuals can not do serious damage but have to invest time to scratch you. They will consider to don't do so because they would lose more building time than you. So if they do not attack you not even get scratches. It is all about deterrence. That is why I would like MMO. Because it would make great buildings in survival possible.
    Multiplayer is too big (in comparison with singleplayer) and too small (in comparison with MMO) to prevent griefing efficiently. That is the problem.
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.