Do you have any idea how many GSF players you are losing because they get into games where dominant teams just sit there and farm all the spawn points? Players are getting killed within 5 seconds of spawning over and over and they can't do anything about it since all three points are farmed.

Yiou're driving away so many players.

I really don't think we are "losing players". I'm so tired of this argument. It's a forum full of Boss Tweeds: "If you don't do exactly as I say you'll never work in this town again!"

For what it is worth, I'd assume never. There's several ways to prevent spawn camping without turning the turrets back on, and other ways to turn the turrets back on without allowing the rare degenerate play we used to see, but all of those are kind of big changes, and this was a reasonable and small change that prevented some stalematish/mild exploitation. It's not the best way, but it's something.

OP, what do you expect coming from turning back the turrets on ?

Not being killed next to your capital ship ? Okay.

But what will happen a few km further since the enemies are able to push you there ? You'll get killed, just further.

And what will happen if you decide to not get out of the safe area ? Nothing. Both team will look at each other, aimless. The score won't move anymore, you'll wait until the end of the timer. Some will get kicked from inactivity.

Turrets, guards, safe zones...

...In domination-type matches, capture-the-flag-type matches (and so on), they achieve something. They limit the frustration of the losing side, while the winning team isn't stopped from winning thanks to the other scoring sources. The match will stop, even if it takes slightly more time (kills are usually a "glass of points" in the the "scoring ocean").

The victory may seem less "tasteful" for some inviduals, but is still "on the way". People may not be achieving victory the way they meant it, but are still achieving it.

... but in deathmatches, where only kills counts, they achieve nothing. Outside of exploits they make possible, they limit the furstration for one side, and turn it into frustration for both sides as both are simply doing nothing. Scoring just stops. No one is achieving neither loss or victory.

The match unecessarily lasts much longer, and if there weren't a timer, end and victory would also be denied.

It's not better, and they end making things worse because of the afore mentionned exploit they make possible.

Here's my only reply for this (extremely dead and beaten) topic:

Hopefully never.

Carry on.

I agree that there are probably some new players that have a very bad experience getting spawn-farmed. Whether it's enough that they quit GSF altogether, I can't say. But it is sub-optimal.

That being said, I agree with Verain that simply turning the turrets on again will make things worse. It won't significantly improve the experience of new pilots, but it will allow lots of stalemating and/or exploit wins.

There have been a couple of other threads where people have proposed more nuanced solutions. I don't know that I've seen a perfect solution yet, but there are ideas that would improve the new player experience while also preventing exploits or stalemates. The trouble is that those nunaced solutions would take development resources that GSF is already starved for.

I will say that, for the most part, I rarely see people purposefully and deliberately "spawn camping". Rather, I think that the winning team just naturally pushes back the losing team. Everyone who plays GSF tabs to a nearby target and seeks to destroy it. As you destroy the closest targets, eventually when you tab next, you target someone who is returning from spawn, and you move to intercept them. That brings you toward their spawn point. Over time, this gets worse and worse, until you are literally on top of the spawn ship.

I know I've been surprised to find myself suddenly next to the enemy capital ship. Whether or not I stay there depends on the score of the match and quality of the competition--but most of the time I am driven away or killed because I'm suddenly surrounded by a bunch of foes. Or because people choose another spawn point and I go to intercept them.

Also note that your own capital ship is a great place to set up a Bomber/Gunship field. Creating your own capital ship turrets out of mines, drones and railguns. Use your capital ship structure for LOS.

So sad... You know it was worst before.. cause the dominant team was the one standing at spawn and waiting for their cap ship to do the job??

And yet most people who've commented about cap ship turrets can't cite matches where this occurred. In fact over the course of GSF, this complaint has only been noted on a couple of servers by a couple of pilots. I personally have never seen the winning team hide at their cap ship. Could it happen?, most certainly but using this as an excuse or omitting that it was by far not a common occurrence muddies the conversation due to a lack of perspective and comparison.

That being said, I agree with Verain that simply turning the turrets on again will make things worse. It won't significantly improve the experience of new pilots, but it will allow lots of stalemating and/or exploit wins.

Worse? Doubtful that it'll make anything worse. The most it'll do is give the same group of people who've complained about a stationary zone of death a continued topic to complain about. The simple point is that TDM hasn't improved or gotten worse in the absence of cap ship turrets through most matches.

And again, the conversation is muddied and the perspective warped by using an inaccurate claim that it would/will "allow lots of stalemating..." Hardly. Cap ship turrets had very little impact during TDM beyond catching a would be pursuer going *** when they're blasted out of the sky in a hot and heavy pursuit.

OP, what do you expect coming from turning back the turrets on ?

 

... but in deathmatches, where only kills counts, they achieve nothing. Outside of exploits they make possible, they limit the furstration for one side, and turn it into frustration for both sides as both are simply doing nothing. Scoring just stops. No one is achieving neither loss or victory.

What would I expect from turning the turrets back on? A safe spawn location for pilots. I think that much is obvious.

So why do you think they achieve nothing? PVP traditionally grants teams a safe spawning location... and if they don't it's likely because the match ends when everybody has died, much like our 4v4 arenas. However, in GSF... unless you get killed, you can sit and camp an area endlessly. So there are some ends and outs... such as spawning in one of the other two locations. Fair enough, but in the matches for which this topic is typically referring to... you know, those matches of <5 kills versus 50, where one team absolutely dominates... it is safe to say there isn't much to keep the wolves at bay.

...

The same people who declare that cap ship turrets shouldn't be on refuse to acknowledge that simple solutions to the problem exist and that by all rights, players should be able to spawn safely outside of the range of a gunship, not within a bomber ball, and away from the buzzing shots of scouts. These folks complain about the turrets because they tend to slow down their inevitable victory, but they don't seemingly want to acknowledge that even in the past, there were always pilots on the losing side who left the safety of the cap ships to fly to their inevitable demise. The scoring may slow, but it never stopped outright.

I've listed out a simple solution to the problem, one that eliminated the often over-stated event of the winning team hide, while also providing safe spawn to a team that was being utterly decimated. Most of you participating in this thread have likely seen it.

Rather than being intellectually dishonest to the OP, why not be honest about what the reality was with the cap ships... how often they actually were a factor and what those scenarios were, and then perhaps consider that if the goal is to expand the appeal of GSF... that turning the turrets back on (with potentially some nuanced changes) would be better than doing nothing than defending the would be over-zealous pursuers.

Hell... I'll even give you a new solution here and now... rather than having cap ship turrets blasting most fighters out of the sky in 2-3 shots... decrease the power of their shots further. Yeah, it's a bit wimpy to think a cap ship couldn't blast out a small ship quickly, but I think most would overlook this detail. Don't think this simple change is enough?, how about coupling it with the previous suggestion I've made.

There is a middle road folks.

 

I've listed out a simple solution to the problem, one that eliminated the often over-stated event of the winning team hide, while also providing safe spawn to a team that was being utterly decimated. Most of you participating in this thread have likely seen it.

 

Yes, your solution (cap turrets only defend losing team) would be fine in my opinion, and would improve the situation.

I don't really care about victories being slowed down a bit.

But I do care very much about winning teams retreating to their capital ship to wait out the clock. We've seen people do that with BomberGunship balls--frequently--and that actually requires effort and coordination, and is not foolproof.

You think they wouldn't do it if all it takes is spawning and sitting still, with guaranteed success?

So no... if someone comes in here and simply says, "Turn the turrets back on" I will vehemently disagree.

But if someone says, "Turn the turrets back on, with these nuances to prevent exploits" I will gladly engage in that conversation.

But that conversation has been had, at length, in the other thread. Your suggestion, I feel, was the best one. Maybe you should make it in an OP, so the devs (if any are left in this forum) see it.

Ratpoison, as one of the people who played the very first day to today, the death of cap ship turrets in TDMs is a freakin blessing - I can remember A LOT of matches where the losing team sat back in their little "feel good ball" on their cap ship. I rolled GS specifically to kill those who would inadvertently travel outside their safety net.

No, when a team was down by 22 points and the score reads, 43 to 21 AND they were tired of ruining their KD, they retreated to cap ships and let the turrets offer them safety. THIS HAPPENED ALL THE FREAKIN TIME. Being better than an entire team meant nothing if you prevent the opposition from killing you, forcing an additional X minute wait. It wasn't fun to postpone the inevitable - flying in your little sphere doesn't make you better. In fact, you can do that very thing in the tutorial and not waste MY time because YOUR TEAM sucks. Period - I wouldn't keep a 1 legged, no eyed, blistering skin chipmunk on life support for 30 years because it's pointless. This is exactly what turning cap ship turrets does.

P.S. Your "safe spawn" idea is dumb. Press enter, tell everyone spawn up top. Oh that's where everyone was just spawning? Spawn bottom? What, they only have 8 players but you can't clear out either of those two spots? Spawn mid. The point of the game is to have space ship battles. Your safespawn idea is a waste and counter intuitive to what the game was designed for. Bringing these back would just be a waste of time and effort, and cause more problems than it would solve (If you're asking for this, I don't expect you to be as godlike as some others, which basically means the same thing as it does in the real world - suggests are best received and implemented from the top down. I don't trust the junior accountant to handle a multi-national corporation's finances when the CFO has A LOT more experience and general understanding).

P.S.S. We're saying this because we were here when they were implemented. They allowed for BS tactics that didn't involve any gameplay or strategy. "Hey, one scout leave while the rest stay at the base and get a kill, then we'll all hang back". ****, that is NOT a game worth playing. We've been through this before and there are much better options than this one. Hell, just giving the sides 3 spawns is enough. The worse team will lose regardless.

So why do you think they achieve nothing? PVP traditionally grants teams a safe spawning location... and if they don't it's likely because the match ends when everybody has died, much like our 4v4 arenas. However, in GSF... unless you get killed, you can sit and camp an area endlessly. So there are some ends and outs... such as spawning in one of the other two locations. Fair enough, but in the matches for which this topic is typically referring to... you know, those matches of <5 kills versus 50, where one team absolutely dominates... it is safe to say there isn't much to keep the wolves at bay.

in traditionnal PvP, it is okay, because if the team falls back to respawn and can't get out of it, there are usually, contol points, or some kind of mechanics that allows the overwhelmingly winning team to score.

So even if nothing happens anymore, combat-wise, the match continues and it will end early, as it's due. You barely have the time to get bored.

In addition, kills are usually so meaningless compared to objectives that not being able to earn kills barely lengthen the duration.

Traditionnal deathmatches, are usually arenas, where you can't respawn farm, as you don't respawn. People chickening in the safe spawn area (when there's one) usually get kicked.

But in GSF deathmatches (or in any game that would get the same rule-set), It achieves nothing, because there is no difference between being attacked at spawn, and flying safely 5s before being attacked. The result is the same : you end getting farmed...

...until you not exit that area where nothing happens anymore, and we reach the situation I talked about before, enemies looking at each other, waiting for a timer to run out, no scoring pending.

So instead of ending early, it last to the maximum duration.

In that last situation, it only makes the match painful to both teams :

- one is waiting for their loss to be "official", and has to wait for a very long time

- the other one has the "normal victory" denied, and have their time wasted.

And this is not even accounting the inactivity timer that may come and kick people before the end of the match, denying them the right to claim their win, (or consolation prize when losing) because they have no means to be tagged as "active".

It's almost winner griefing (you ruined my day by being overwhelmingly strong, so I'll waste your time)

That's not the problem. The problem is the matchmaker somehow thinking this is a good matchup:

10 noobs who fire rapids at 20km and don't know what their engine ability is for, with one or two who know what's about to happen.

vs

The premades everyone's afraid of, with maybe one or two noobs mixed in who might be fodder if anyone ever got off their spawn.

I've played both sides of that, and it's either really boring or just plain frustrating. Yeah, yeah, find and queue a group. Easy for someone with a friends list full of aces.

Turning on the turrets would only help stop spawn mining, because the turrets wouldn't let the bombers get close and get rid of the minefields.

Ratpoison, as one of the people who played the very first day to today, the death of cap ship turrets in TDMs is a freakin blessing - I can remember A LOT of matches where the losing team sat back in their little "feel good ball" on their cap ship.

Well, for starters... I love the presumptions being made from start to end... but contrary to your assumption I too... have been playing since day one.

Next, a lot of matches where the losing team sat back at their feel good ball?... No it was more likely in these matches that a few players sat back at their feel good ball and the few stragglers that ventured out were downed so quickly everybody else felt bored. I've played more than my fair share of matches and even before turrets were killed, I never, repeat, never, had a match where the entirety or even most of a team hid at their cap ships because they were getting stomped.

And what's it matter? You're going to complain about having to wait for the match to end because the score starts to only creep along? Well let's be intellectually intuitive here and make a suggestion rather than dig our heels into the ground and shake our head like a stubborn two year old.

If you're so bitter about winning a match slowly, then perhaps the suggestion, or idea to put forth is to produce a mercy rule that allows an opposing team to opt to end a match early. See... talking about a problem isn't that hard, coming up with simple solutions... not that hard. The game has an underused vote kick system from PvP that likely could be easily adapted to allow votes in game to be tallied once a score becomes lopsided (aka mercy rule) to give the expedient end you so wish.

I truly like how you end your post with, and I paraphrase, that there are much better options out there... yet where are these glorious and constructive conversations Sammy? Where are these.... --simple-- solutions that would give people the ability to play this game without being stomped due to a low player pool and consequently poor match making?

Traditionnal deathmatches, are usually arenas, where you can't respawn farm, as you don't respawn. People chickening in the safe spawn area (when there's one) usually get kicked.

 

But in GSF deathmatches (or in any game that would get the same rule-set), It achieves nothing, because there is no difference between being attacked at spawn, and flying safely 5s before being attacked. The result is the same : you end getting farmed...

So the end result of your logic is... to hey, lets just let them spawn and die in those instants? Come on, that's not even a reasonable argument. An experienced pilot spawning into a bomber ball dies all the same as a newbie. So if you can rationalize that in traditional death matches, people get but one life and then the match resets, then it should be easy to recognize that having no reset allows camping to be a tactic. I don't think that that is an intentional design or necessarily fair, perhaps you disagree and if so... fair enough.

...until you not exit that area where nothing happens anymore, and we reach the situation I talked about before, enemies looking at each other, waiting for a timer to run out, no scoring pending.

So instead of ending early, it last to the maximum duration.

Sure, but the winning team still wins. The issue of cap ship turrets... or so it has been decried multiple times as to why they should be off is because the team with the higher score would hide behind the cap ships until the match ended. Of course, between you and Sammy there seems to now be the emerging the complaint of having to now wait to claim the win, so ... an easy solution is again, a mercy rule for an opposing team, either activated by a vote command, or by a disparity of points.

...

For once, and I know this is expecting much... rather than simply listing out endless and ever changing complaints, why not hash out the issue and propose solutions that compromise to achieve a goal. Crazy as it may seem, simply and stubbornly saying no without any regard to the absolute carnage being wrecked on new pilots by piss poor matchmaking systems is ignoring one key fact about gaming... all parties should be given a chance to spawn and pick their method of death.

...

So there, three potential solutions to all the problems you all have listed. Cap ships that turn on and off based on the difference in the TDM score for the losing team. A mercy rule. And lessening the damage that cap ship turrets do.

All of them, at least by my guess from mechanics that we already see in game... potentially not that hard to implement.

Now, to the rest of those reading... if you feel there is no problem with TDM and everything is great. So be it, but rather than shaking your head no and stubbornly refusing to acknowledge a differing perspective, consider the suggestions being made and their pros and cons... and try discussing, revamping, or proposing different. Thanks.

Just a little thing.. As an experienced player.. Spawning in a bomber ball is easy to counter... Spawn on something with CP.. Kill bombers. Profit. That's why I always make sure I have one or two CP builds in my line up when I queue on toon with more than two useful ships.

In the maybe 200 matches between TDM arrival and spawn turrets going on strike I played, I've seen a winning team staying at spawn about a dozens of matches. And a losing team stalling, three or four times.

And seriously, if you're getting farmed at spawn, you deserve it. If I can hold a spawn solo against 3-4 ships... Well they deserve to be camped. Killing a bomber is easy. Killing a gunship camping is harder but still easy on about any ship. Killing a battlescout intent on farming you can be a lot harder... Until your whole team coordinates.

And between you know that whole area between spawn and cover one has to travel through?? Well that's why no one will pull off a spawn. Going into that when you were just farming the enemy is a death sentence. Except some scout no ship has enough boost to get off spawn while avoiding lock and making it hard to not be gunned down by a gunship. It's simply easier to stay there and farm than to pull off and be focused without cover.

Ok, you want the Cap Ship Turrets back, that can be done but need a few modifications.

1. Add a visible bubble around the cap ship. If an attacking ship enters or attacks a ship inside this bubble the turrets will attack & kill the attacking ship.

2. Add a spawn timer. This timer would start when you spawn and countdown. Once it reaches 0, if you are still inside the bubble you would die from friendly fire from the the Cap Ship Turrets.

3. If you retreat and re-enter the bubble you would die from friendly fire from the the Cap Ship Turrets.

Those ideas are all silly. Anything that involves "no retreat" or "friendly fire" is ludicrous.

There are other solutions, but honestly, the easiest would just be spawn points not all along that edge if your team is lagging, like you can spawn center top, etc. It could even default you there to help new players- or better yet, default you to whichever "needs the help" such that a wad of players spawns middle, then next time they spawn south spawn (normal), etc.

I liked the idea that additional spawn points would be created if losing by 10+ kills. Read that in the last thread about this.

The main issue is why delay the *** whopping? You're going to get beat, and in the spirit of PVP, dragging it on goes against the combative situation. I don't know why your server didn't have the safety net space at the cap ships, but on Jung'Ma, it was annoying as hell to wait for the opportunity to kill someone who has retreated to their cap ship. It may not be "nice" but this is a PVP game, and the old method was broken and wrong. There's a reason they took them out

Hence why the suggested addition of a mercy rule which could be activated by a player initiated command and vote (not far unlike the vote kick system that we had(?) in the pvp ground game), or by a preset difference in scores for not only TDM, but also Domination. Just because a team is getting their *** whooped doesn't mean it needs to be dragged out to the end of a match. I know I don't take any great pleasure in stomping new pilots into the pavement, and would be absolutely fine if they could vote to end the match. I opine this as a far better result than simply reminding them of their plight with death after death till the match ends.

Still this alone, doesn't do anything in the grand scheme of things to provide safe entry into a match, or the ability to even get ones fix on the situation after spawning. I know I take a moment after a death to look at the map closer to see where the mismatches are or could be, but I doubt many less experienced pilots take those seconds to figure anything out until they're flying once again and seeing the red markers flying in the actual map.

...

And for the record, I personally don't care if the cap ship turrets ever get turned back on. I do however recognize that there were far fewer matches impacted by turrets prior to their dismissal while not long after they were terminated spawn camping and the inadvertent result of pushing a team back to their spawn became common place. And since we're all being honest, I've not seen beyond screenshots from others of matches where some or all of the spawn points were being camped in various matches. I'm certain this is a rarity like the other scenarios talked about. Still, if the premise of turning the turrets off is to prevent one tactic that was a rarity, then turning them on to prevent another rare event should also be a compelling reason. Of course, making changes to how they function to compromise the two issues would be the goal so as to give each side of the coin balance going forward.

...

And Nemarus, I've noted your suggested of making a new thread, but since there has been little to no positive feedback for the idea by the few people participating in the forum, I'm skeptical that such a topic would foster any positive discussion.

I opine this as a far better result than simply reminding them of their plight with death after death till the match ends.

I think you would want something that would add points very very slowly if a team was winning, but faster and easily countered. That's better than just vote quit to end IMO.

I do however recognize that there were far fewer matches impacted by turrets prior to their dismissal while not long after they were terminated spawn camping and the inadvertent result of pushing a team back to their spawn became common place.

I do actually concur with this. The spawn turrets didn't matter much. But it could be an issue when it did.

I've not seen beyond screenshots from others of matches where some or all of the spawn points were being camped in various matches.

I definitely spawn camp enough that I would say it is a thing.

I think you would want something that would add points very very slowly if a team was winning, but faster and easily countered. That's better than just vote quit to end IMO.

I'm not sure I understand fully what you're getting at... and if you mean that having a method of adding points if cap ship turrets were on? Assuming that you do, then you can add a mechanism to encourage occupation of the central portion of the map.

Of course, I deeply believe that only simple solutions ever get implemented in games with low population/interest... one possible way of discouraging pushing a team back to their spawns would be to reward points for occupying an area of the map (in this case the center). But instead of having it be such a tiny area like in domination with satellites, make the area huge, and encompassing at least 50% (or more of the map). Reward a fraction of a point for every ship on the team that is within that area for a minute, and have it added to the score through the match.

This makes it more than just an outright death match, but if the area in play is large enough and killing ships yields points faster (unlike in domination) then this is one possible method to add points. I would also say that this addition would be applicable for both teams, meaning that if both teams are in the area for the whole minute (without dying or leaving the space) they would both accumulate the same amount of points.

As I dream this up though, I can think of a very very silly pilot of JC who likes to hop on a bomber in TDM and go to an obscure corner with one way in and sit there all match in the tight space with his mines. The locations he uses are such that a gunship can't pop him or his mines safely. In above scenario, as an extreme example, if all of the team hid in a hole as bombers and dropped mines while within this area... the other team would be likely SOL in their ability to win.

Though I guess if a team did that even now... the outcome would be the same, so I'm not sure if that's worth being concerned over.

I don't know... somebody else is bound to have simple ideas?

The main problem with spawn camping is the fact, that ships are visible - and vunlerable - while their pilots have 'hyperspace' animation played, and the ships can't be controlled ... i.e. they are just slow moving targets.Rail crit, barrage of lasers, mines, drones etc - can kill the ship before it will even be able to be controlled by pilot.

So, one idea - ship should be visible no sooner than they are controllable. Maybe even 3-4 second long invulnerability would help even better (to counter mines, drones etc). Lets call it a 'hyperspace distortion'

Of course, this wouldn't apply to ships going via the hyperspace beacon...

Hence why the suggested addition of a mercy rule which could be activated by a player initiated command and vote (not far unlike the vote kick system that we had(?) in the pvp ground game), or by a preset difference in scores for not only TDM, but also Domination. Just because a team is getting their *** whooped doesn't mean it needs to be dragged out to the end of a match. I know I don't take any great pleasure in stomping new pilots into the pavement, and would be absolutely fine if they could vote to end the match. I opine this as a far better result than simply reminding them of their plight with death after death till the match ends.

Important question: How are newbies supposed to know how to vote to end the match?

I don't really see asking for nuances to concepts that aren't being implemented or even well received to be necessarily important. We can dream up anything to satiate your question, but there's not much point to the hypothetical.

The vote kick system in PVP was toggled through and voted in via the chat box. Morphing the existing system to accommodate this aspect would potentially be a simple route, however, we can dream up anything we'd like as an alternative as well. For example, hitting escape and having an added option in the window to vote to end the match early, obviously a non-vote would be against, and it can be stipulated that 75% of the team would need to vote to end the match.

But again, we can make up any of the nuances we'd like... and hash out the hypotheticals. To me, that's less important until there is evidence the concept itself is an acceptable solution or addition.