02-14-2014, 06:20 AM
Alpha had 30 minute timer. It was actually a big deal for us to expand it from the default of 15 minutes due to our strict SVS policy, but over time, 15 mins really proved it was a tad too short. 9 or 12 hours? Ridiculous! Also, dual logging used to be an issue when people parked a second login on their freq at J14 and just used it for free team anti... not sure if that is a consideration today or not.
There is a server.ini setting:
NoAntiInSafe=0
Use it or don't use it... there should be no need for dynamically changing it. With the setting allowing anti, you have players saying 'i forgot to turn it off when i entered the safety'. With the setting disabling anti, people will say 'i forgot to turn it on when I left safety'. Pick the lesser of the evils, or the more desired result and stick with it.
As far as the pro's and con's, I think they have been covered reasonably well. What is more important is the effect on gameplay... certain points can be a pro or a con, but if they rarely impact gameplay, then it doesn't really matter, so an aggregate 'there are more pros than cons' doesn't work. What IS important is generating more gameplay and happy gamers.
Axe killed his own argument:
<div> </div>
<div>
Then goes on to say:
<div> </div>
<div>
So safety isn't really about saving a ship. To reinforce this statement, I would say that players who care about the quality of their ships have !bonus options to use. If they use their !bonus to max a ship to their standards every time they return from an afk session longer than 30 minutes, it provides an incentive to play more in order to regain the !bonus points that they are using. So rather than sitting around with 60-70 bonus with a 250 bounty ship in safety all the time, you end up with players actually playing (not in a safety) with say 40 !bonus with an incentive to play more.
As a final note, I would like to mention 'new players'. Hopefully this won't derail the topic at hand, but IMO, what the general public thinks about a new player's behavior and thought process are compete guesses. To add on to that, I would doubt that new players occur often enough to really change the zone settings to cater to them. During the downward slide of Alpha, I learned that it was more important to cater to the current playerbase than to try to cater to the new player. You will lose more players due to attrition and displeasure with their opinion of their zone than you will end up gaining through influx of new players trying to 'guess' what you think you need to do to make them stay. Players leave the game/zone more frequently than they start playing/adopt a new zone.
Summary: do 30 minutes, it makes players start a new ship and use their bonus, then play to replenish it. New players prefer a fair fight, so their 70 vs a safety-saved 250 or 1000 sucks for them anyway. Use the zone setting to turn off anti in safety if it's really an issue.
There is a server.ini setting:
NoAntiInSafe=0
Use it or don't use it... there should be no need for dynamically changing it. With the setting allowing anti, you have players saying 'i forgot to turn it off when i entered the safety'. With the setting disabling anti, people will say 'i forgot to turn it on when I left safety'. Pick the lesser of the evils, or the more desired result and stick with it.
As far as the pro's and con's, I think they have been covered reasonably well. What is more important is the effect on gameplay... certain points can be a pro or a con, but if they rarely impact gameplay, then it doesn't really matter, so an aggregate 'there are more pros than cons' doesn't work. What IS important is generating more gameplay and happy gamers.
Axe killed his own argument:
<div> </div>
<div>
Quote:When one has a ship and one wants to keep it. You have to check into the game. If you want to play the game through out the day then having a ship is so much better then a new spawn.</div>
Then goes on to say:
<div> </div>
<div>
Quote:anyone who has a 70 bounty start has a full ship</div>
So safety isn't really about saving a ship. To reinforce this statement, I would say that players who care about the quality of their ships have !bonus options to use. If they use their !bonus to max a ship to their standards every time they return from an afk session longer than 30 minutes, it provides an incentive to play more in order to regain the !bonus points that they are using. So rather than sitting around with 60-70 bonus with a 250 bounty ship in safety all the time, you end up with players actually playing (not in a safety) with say 40 !bonus with an incentive to play more.
As a final note, I would like to mention 'new players'. Hopefully this won't derail the topic at hand, but IMO, what the general public thinks about a new player's behavior and thought process are compete guesses. To add on to that, I would doubt that new players occur often enough to really change the zone settings to cater to them. During the downward slide of Alpha, I learned that it was more important to cater to the current playerbase than to try to cater to the new player. You will lose more players due to attrition and displeasure with their opinion of their zone than you will end up gaining through influx of new players trying to 'guess' what you think you need to do to make them stay. Players leave the game/zone more frequently than they start playing/adopt a new zone.
Summary: do 30 minutes, it makes players start a new ship and use their bonus, then play to replenish it. New players prefer a fair fight, so their 70 vs a safety-saved 250 or 1000 sucks for them anyway. Use the zone setting to turn off anti in safety if it's really an issue.