[FUBAR-BDHR]

The infamous Squadwar will be returning to FS2 at some point.  This thread is for the discussion of features and fixes you would like to see.  I've already started a list so I'm posting it. 



Can't hit the no-show until the scheduled match time.  People used this because they didn't like match times.  If I remember correctly the attacking team gave the defenders a choice of 2 times.  Not sure what could be done here but the old system resulted in locked matches that would take forever to clear.

Locked up entry points.  Basically you could only enter from an entry node.  As time went on and the better squads started taking over the map new and weaker squads were unable to challenge.  The locked matches really made this a problem.

Team limits.  Another thing people started taking advantage of was creating multiple squads with virtually the same players.  This way they could make more challenges and control more entry nodes.  A limit on the number of squads a person can belong to would help.  2 would be more then enough.  I'd actually prefer one.  Of course there isn't a reason why a person couldn't be on a different squad if his normal squad doesn't participate in a particular league.

Event logs and outcome sent to file and FS2netD.  This would make it easy to resolve arguments and locked matches due to stats not saving.  The old method was print screens and email. For file some sort of security would be needed to keep people from editing them.

Expired matches.  Some way of making the teams that don't play matches suffer the consequences.  The old system had some sort of limit on when matches could be scheduled but I can't remember what it was.  Again the big problem was the no-show.  Another was the ability to play before the scheduled time.  Well not the scheduled time but the minimum allowed time before the next match.  Since we know when people log in we could actually check the no-show with who is on.  If only one team shows we award the node.  If neither team shows and no reschedule is selected both loose their nodes.

Reschedule.  Like no-show it was abused.  If a squad didn't like a time for any reason they would just hit reschedule button immediately.  Usually they would hit both no-show and reschedule.  A limit on the time to reschedule should be enforced as should the maximum of reschedules.

"Node swapping"  A practice where 2 squads with an alliance exchange nodes in order to get multiple attacks on another squad.  They would just play a couple of dummy matches that were thrown.  Should be banned.

Bigger node map:  Gives more teams a chance.  Would cut down on the entry node problem as well.

Exe file validation.  Something new since it's open source now.  Need a way to make sure someone didn't change the program to make it easier for them to win.  (probably not going to happen but it's here just for the record)

Mission selection.  Most of the matches in Squadwar were played in either NWTR or one of the Gannys.  One squad in particular like using the nebula one because it gave a great advantage to the host.  Now this might not be the case with the fixes but I always thought it would be neat if the mission was determined by the nodes.  Say a node (A) is connected to 3 other nodes (X,Y,Z).  An attack from node X on node A would always be NWTR.  An attack from node Y on node A would always be MT-07.  Node Z on node A MT-13.  Just distribute the missions randomly based on the number of lines connecting the nodes times 2.

A subset of validated missions that are valid for squadwar.  So basically you can't just choose any old validated TvT mission it will need to be one with even stricter validation standards to be allowed for squadwar.  (already in the works)

[captain-custard]

yay , all the above and can we have it tomorrow?

but seriously what is the limit to how many ppl in each squad?

[chief1983]

Not sure but I bet changing it breaks pilot files

[FUBAR-BDHR]

I don't think there was a limit to number of people in a squad.  The only restriction was there had to be at least 2 people. 

[taylor]

From the code it looks like:
2 teams
1 player minimum on each team
4 players max on each team

Changing any of that would only affect retail SW compatibility, but since I have no intention of keeping the rewrite compatible I don't why that should be an issue.

[chief1983]

That sounds like the limitation for a particular mission's teams, are you saying that Squads themselves are also limited to 4 people?  I thought Squads were bigger and any 4 people from a squad could participate in a match.

[captain-custard]

with the changes that have been implemented in multiplayer could the maximum players in each team be boosted to 6 or 8 in each team

[taylor]

That sounds like the limitation for a particular mission's teams, are you saying that Squads themselves are also limited to 4 people?  I thought Squads were bigger and any 4 people from a squad could participate in a match.

No, just that 4 people from each squad can play at once.  But I think that number needs to be bumped if possible.  That is the only real limit that I see though, nothing that applies to the number of people that can actually be in a squad or the number of squads.  I still haven't been through all of the old website stuff though so there could be some sort of limit somewhere that I just haven't seen yet.

[chief1983]

I'd almost rather see more teams allowed than more players per team, but I have a feeling that's several orders of magnitude more difficult.  Not really related to squadwar anyway, but since we're talking about multi limits...

[JGZinv]

Are we talking strictly SquadWar here, or can we make suggestions for the benefit of mod
integration?

Note too that a fair amount of people (like myself) haven't been around long enough
to have experienced SquadWar first hand, although we got the concept from reading about it.

[captain-custard]

ok i have very little idea on the basic rules concerning the ships allowed in squadwars , and are you allowed to hack the tables for this .... or would it be a case of choose your ship from theses ..... as proposed from the game


its just an idea as each squad is built up (lets imagine its for real) each team his going to have engineers mechanics trying to tweak the most out of there machine , adding bits and pieces(lets say thats this is limited to weapons and systems that would be compatable in size and power requirements and species relevent) and each team would have to post the tables for there ships so they can be judged as legal ( no modifications to the basic initial hit points of the ship)

so if you managed tomod your ship to have a rear facing gun (AI) this would draw from the ships power  and would limit your forward fire as such , after that it would be down to a group of mods and admins to set the rules for what was legal within the said rules .....


anyway its just an idea , away to advance the developement of the game play and to create a more realistic scense of what would be a little like a competition feel in the scense of motor racing (nascar or such) ( i use nascar as a very loose example  different makes of vehicle all restricted by weight and silohette competing in the same competition )


this is something ive been waiting for...........

 

[taylor]

Are we talking strictly SquadWar here, or can we make suggestions for the benefit of mod
integration?

Strictly SquadWar discussion in this thread.  You can make other multi related requests in this thread though.

[FUBAR-BDHR]

From the code it looks like:
2 teams
1 player minimum on each team
4 players max on each team

Changing any of that would only affect retail SW compatibility, but since I have no intention of keeping the rewrite compatible I don't why that should be an issue.

Yea that is what the code limit was but the website and rules required at least 2 members to play a match.  1v1 were supposedly forbidden.  There was no way to prevent it and it was used a lot to get the match to save when validation failed.  Basically a dummy match 2 member enter one shoots the other jump type thing.  Hopefully we won't experience any of that type of problem though.  It was also abused for the "node swapping" I mentioned. 

So 2v2 minimum for a match.  No max except code limits (4v4).  If the code is updated then there is no reason that 8v8 or more shouldn't  be allowed unless lag starts to be a major issue. 
2 members minimum for a team due to the above.  No max number of members on a team. 
A person can only be on X number of teams and is not allowed to participate if 2 teams he is on play each other.  X should be a small number. 

That reminds me of another issue that was never clearly spelled out.  2v2 2v3 4v2 etc.  If a team only has 2 members should 4 players be allowed to play against them in a 4v2 or should it always be equal player vs player numbers. 

[GTSVA]

I'm not in a squad yet...Any suggestions?

[Blue Lion]

And ending. Quite often TCX or DW or another squad/alliance would lock up a vast majority of nodes and that was it. Smaller squads could only fight over the precious few entry nodes and the stronger squads spent their time either making dummy or secondary squads.

I think once a map reaches a point where either a squad or alliance reaches a certain number of nodes or the number of matches vs nodes reaches a low number (meaning inactivity for whatever reason) the map should be closed and reset.

And I honestly don't think there are all that many people left from SW. 2 dozen maybe?

[Androgeos Exeunt]

I want to experience SquadWar now that I have FS2 and am old enough to know what is going on.

[Charismatic]

Im with AE. I came around when SW ended so I never got a taste of the glory.

[Warlock]

Well...my thoughts on a few things:

If you change the default max I'd suggest no more than 6-8 but make that depend on the mission profile. Some misson set ups can be completely voided due to piloting skills of one team over another.

Now granted I've been out of the loop for longer than the game was supported offically....so please bare with faulty memories. One of the issues I recall was, the Demios mission IIRC ...I know it was one of the protect/destory cruiser missions, you could comepletely ignore your cap ship and just rack up pilot kills and win the match everytime due to point count on the caps being seriously under balanced.

Another trick was using the Ery with full load of Kysers and simply long distance gunning transports while another team mate covered you and two others went toe to toe with the enemy.

Luckily we shouldn't have to worry about the old "lag bombing" tactic anymore.

So I'd say one of the biggest things to flesh out, aside from the basic hosting/scoring system, would be mission design. Once you have a set group of missions you can then talor rules to account for possible "illegal tactics" in said missions.

I do agree that some sort of verification system needs to be in place since everythings open source now. Even down to simple table editting needs to be the same for everyone one playing in each and every match.


Random thought: instead of simply a node map that we had in the old days, how about several node maps? Each map is it's own "quadrant" for lack of a better term, each one a different tier in the competition. Once a squad performs well enough to control a certain number of nodes in quad 1, they get moved to quad 2, same for quad 3 which would be the top squads fighting for control. This would allow for a good blend of competition among newer, less skilled squads and upper level squads.

[Mav]

Random thought: instead of simply a node map that we had in the old days, how about several node maps? Each map is it's own "quadrant" for lack of a better term, each one a different tier in the competition. Once a squad performs well enough to control a certain number of nodes in quad 1, they get moved to quad 2, same for quad 3 which would be the top squads fighting for control. This would allow for a good blend of competition among newer, less skilled squads and upper level squads.

Good idea .



Personally, I'd most want the possibility to select the species a squad belongs to (Shivan for me ) , which of course might need special re-balanced versions of the original ships and weapons...
[wait - there's still no dedicated Shivan smiley? *arrgh* - *dies*...]

Or at least some other sort of balancing, maybe only allowing matches with player ratios (2 Terran : 3 Vasudan : 4 or 5 Shivan) or something...

Anyway, that's what I'd like to have in, thank you for reading .

[BlackDove]

Once upon a time, written by Lightspeed. Most of this I doubt anyone would go to the trouble of making, but here it is.

IF this is to work, the following things are essential:

-> Full moderation access
-> A properly planned and working auto-forfeit system
-> Automatically generated "maps"
-> Several very dedicated people donating their time

As for throwing around ideas:

I think a fixed "Squadwar" server would be a very good idea. The idea would be a server having two functions:

1) Any SW games would be played on it via dedicated host. I realize people will scream about bad connections to the server, but it would prevent.... certain things.

2) Track the data and generate the according missions.

I also have a bit "larger" concept, I'll try going through the major points here. Note that most of it is insabe gibberish and probably beyond implementation:

Each owned system would slowly build up itself. The server stores a mission file for each system, and will auto generate content in it over time. This would mainly be:

-> Stations
-> Patrol wings with random generated waypoints
-> Cruiser/Corvette defense to blockade the jumpnodes

The ships would carry the squad tag, as in SSXI Arcadia, SSXCv Deimos, etc. The names would be picked from a random pre-generated list. A player will always be represented with the nametag as well, as in, the individual ship will carry the name (or alt name, as it was untill now).

This process is limited however, so a system may very well reach its "maximum defense".

One such system may span a distance of say, 25000 kilometres radius, the according jump nodes at each end.

Each squad will have a main system, which can be altered later on. If a squad has no system yet, they will have to conquer a system (or claim an unused one) which will automatically become their home sector.

There would be several "scenarios" alike to the multiplayer missions. The defending team will know in advance which scenario will be played; the attackers will not know until the actual mission is generated. Each mission would remain unique as there may be different variables (for instance, a shivan attack may (little probabilty however) occur or may not) which even the defending team is clueless about. The defending team will have limited support of the system's fleet (see above).

If the match would "auto forfeit", which is, the defending team does not respond to the attack, a mission will be generated which pits the attackers against the defending fleet (as seen above).

Either case, if the mission is won, the attacking team wins the system, and all ships currently in the system will be destroyed. The system will immediately begin building up defenses of its new owner.

To prevent idling squadrons clinging onto their defenses, from time to time "shivan incursions" may happen as random events. These can happen in any unchallenged system (anywhere, basically) and are, in kind, somewhat treated like a SW match. A deadline will have to be scheduled (2-3 weeks?), but it can be dealt with any time before that deadline. If the deadline is met and the incursion is not beaten back, the system will lose its owner and remain "unclaimed". The incursion itself would be a randomized coop-kind of mission (not too hard). Basically, the players spawn in the middle of their system and shivans warp in. If the shivans kill a specific target (ideally an installation) the system will be lost.

And last but not least... The members of a squad will be an imaginatory attack fleet (i.e. will NEVER appear in-game, and exist only on "paper" and the websites). They will always "spawn" at the home system if they lose a fight. A fleet may be moved at a certain rate. If the system currently containing the fleet is challenged, the defender will have a bonus in defending the system (a fair advantage). The fleet may only move through friendly territory. If the territory of a squad is split up, i.e. NOT connected through jump nodes, all systems that can NOT be reached from the home system will be considered "auto forfeit", which means they can not be defended by the players, but only the AI which currently resides in them. (see above). As soon as the systems are re-connected, the players can jump to the defense again. (which should be a lot better than what the AI can throw at intruders. However the AI is not to be underestimated. A fully built system should stand a fair chance against an attack.)

To prevent a squad from coveniently moving their home sector just around when it's split up, the home sector may only be changed to where the fleet currently is. If the fleet happens to be in the part which was cut off from the home sector, they CAN defend against attacks against that cut-off part (and ONLY that part). However, as soon as one defense is lost, the fleet will respawn at the home sector, and the part will be without players. Another possibility would be to change the home sector to the one the fleet is in, in which case they would respawn there, but in turn be unable to defend the other part.

Because it may happen that the fleet is stuck in the cut off part, and a system connected to the home sector is attacked (in which case the fleet CANNOT defend against it), another mechanism is needed, so it isn't possible to just cut off the fleet from its home sector and then swallow up the rest of the territory, knowing that they cannot return until they lose a fight. That would simply lead to the fleet attacking an adjactent system and losing on purpose. So for this not to happen, there will be the option of "returning" to the home sector, in which case the fleet is, over a short period of time, placed back on the home sector.

I liked that.

SquadWar made FS2 kind of a pseudo MMO. This would make the entire process pushed in that direction.

But an entire system needs to be built up for this. This would however be a v2 of Squad Wars.