HOME     LOGIN     CREATE ACCOUNT     SSW HELP CENTER  

October Iotm Ideas

Secret Society Wars  »  SSW Discussion

  • Posted By: crashnburn11  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

    October Iotm Ideas
    My vote is for a facility shield degenerator... useable once per day, in whatever sector your are in while using it all enemy facilities lose between 1-3 shield charge. Thus, teamwork to destroy enemy facilities in captured sectors is encouraged to deplete them quickly, but there is, for a team of 10, still about a week to deplete, leaving time for retaliation.
  • Posted By: grimdel  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

    Something Halloween based? pumpkin pie gun? scary clown holo-mask?

    or maybe more toward the Samhain/witchy theme - rocket brooms, nuclear cauldrons, zodiac ley line detectors, etc (dont really care what it'll do - im sure you'll think of something cool)

    <edit> speaking of zodiac ley line detectors - maybe having this can reduce the cost of warping around, and or changing the fuel use (what the heck did you implement cardboard shavings for?)
  • Posted By: Salen  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

      Quote "crashnburn11":  

    My vote is for a facility shield degenerator... useable once per day, in whatever sector your are in while using it all enemy facilities lose between 1-3 shield charge. Thus, teamwork to destroy enemy facilities in captured sectors is encouraged to deplete them quickly, but there is, for a team of 10, still about a week to deplete, leaving time for retaliation.



    oooh, I like this, maybe even steal something from them as you deplete it. like a telepet healer thing but Stealer. "You deplete the resources of the facilities in sector 666 and make off with some goods: taking 3 Bo-ray D batteries, 4 omgonite ore, and 8 battle drones....you picked the wrong space neighborhood buddy."

    maybe more ore for minig facs but you have the idea. maybe it only works if the facility is in enemy territory though
  • Posted By: Rickton  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

    I do kinda like the idea of being able to attack facilities, but making it an IOTM seems a little pay-to-win. It'd be an entire useful mechanic that's only accessible to people who pay (or spend a ton of bux buying peen, assuming people want to even sell peen for bux).
  • Posted By: munk  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

      Quote "Rickton":  

    I do kinda like the idea of being able to attack facilities, but making it an IOTM seems a little pay-to-win. It'd be an entire useful mechanic that's only accessible to people who pay (or spend a ton of bux buying peen, assuming people want to even sell peen for bux).



    I agree on the "pay to win" line, that does seem awful close to the edge. making facilities easier to run down and destroy is high on the list, but I've got a fairer idea for that which doesn't involve an IOTM.

    I'm more inclined to do something like have a percentage chance of having the DP's collectively decide to "escape" from facilities in enemy territory, and if the roll succeeds, the DP's run off, return to their owner's cage and the facility is "raided" by the drones of the person who holds the sector with the most drones, and a percentage of what the facility has in it's stores is "looted" by that person.
  • Posted By: Salen  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

      Quote "munk":  

      Quote "Rickton":  

    I do kinda like the idea of being able to attack facilities, but making it an IOTM seems a little pay-to-win. It'd be an entire useful mechanic that's only accessible to people who pay (or spend a ton of bux buying peen, assuming people want to even sell peen for bux).



    I agree on the "pay to win" line, that does seem awful close to the edge. making facilities easier to run down and destroy is high on the list, but I've got a fairer idea for that which doesn't involve an IOTM.

    I'm more inclined to do something like have a percentage chance of having the DP's collectively decide to "escape" from facilities in enemy territory, and if the roll succeeds, the DP's run off, return to their owner's cage and the facility is "raided" by the drones of the person who holds the sector with the most drones, and a percentage of what the facility has in it's stores is "looted" by that person.



    LOL! nice! almost like a scary mask (cue up the old cartoon 'courage the cowardly dog')
  • Posted By: zydecopolka  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

    How about a Dia de Muertos IotM? Something that spits out calaveras, maybe the occasional Xocoatal XXX, steak mole, and a super rare Maquahuitl? Fun, frivolous, definitely not needed to win.
  • Posted By: crashnburn11  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

    I dont like the pets escaping, it defeats the purpose of capturing them in the first place. They can just rebuild somewhere else then. The point is to eliminate their capacities so you can eventually win...
  • Posted By: grimdel  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

    But that pushes the 'pay-to-win' thing. Giving the doppelpets back makes it less-so...

    And speaking of which - October 03rd - need my instant gratification plz?
  • Posted By: Rakkasan  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

      Quote "grimdel":  

    But that pushes the 'pay-to-win' thing. Giving the doppelpets back makes it less-so...



    Huh? How do you figure that?

    By my line of reasoning, allowing the killing off pets in a fashion makes larger cages LESS useful (counter pay-to-win, if you will), as that if someone with a large cage loses pets, they lose production potential that isn't replaceable. If someone with less than the maximum loses pets, big whoop, they go and replace the losses with new ones.

    In any case, I can't even figure out how killing off pets pushes pay-to-win. You can't do anything with paying to counter it or reduce the effects of it. Unless you mean "only kill with an item you paid for", which wasn't what was being posited at the later stage there I don't think, rather a statement about the "base" mechanic wherein death of pets was preferable to escape back to the cage.

    In any case, I'd at least think it better if the pets jettisoned into space and you had to track them down by running around the sectors until you found them, rather than have them come a running home. Or have them die.
  • Posted By: Salen  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

      Quote "Rakkasan":  

      Quote "grimdel":  

    But that pushes the 'pay-to-win' thing. Giving the doppelpets back makes it less-so...



    Huh? How do you figure that?

    In any case, I'd at least think it better if the pets jettisoned into space and you had to track them down by running around the sectors until you found them, rather than have them come a running home. Or have them die.



    Oh that would be hilarious! and I think what he meant was that if there was an ITOM that would kill pets, then the people that pay for the item would be at an advantage as opposed to the peeps that don't have one. however, there have been other items that would've pushed the pay to win button harder than that. the ore derandomizer is a huge benefit to anyone trying to get set up quick and save money

    I'm now a fan of randomly lost pets, maybe like the old quest for rps, no one else can see them, but you have to search for em LOL!
  • Posted By: grimdel  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

      Quote "Rakkasan":  

      Quote "grimdel":  

    But that pushes the 'pay-to-win' thing. Giving the doppelpets back makes it less-so...



    Huh? How do you figure that?



    If you read further above - they were discussing iotms that made it easier to deplete enemy facility shields and blowing them up, killing doppelpets. Munk mused on not liking pay-to-win and letting pets escape exploding facilities - which I assumed applied to the use of the iotm, followed by crash's comment about not liking pets escaping, leading to my comment.

    So essentially you are paying for iotms that diminish your enemies capabilities.

    Though true about what you said about enlarging cages - but that mechanic has been around for most of the game.
  • Posted By: crashnburn11  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

    If we really want to get stuck on the whole pay to win thing drones probably shouldnt get sold for peen in yoobey either, that is far more of an unbalanced benefit than an iotm will ever be.
  • Posted By: munk  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

      Quote "grimdel":  

    Munk mused on not liking pay-to-win and letting pets escape exploding facilities - which I assumed applied to the use of the iotm,



    Incorrect assumption. Not sure how you got that from "I've got a fairer idea for that which doesn't involve an IOTM" (:
  • Posted By: munk  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

      Quote "crashnburn11":  

    If we really want to get stuck on the whole pay to win thing drones probably shouldnt get sold for peen in yoobey either, that is far more of an unbalanced benefit than an iotm will ever be.



    heh, I got that idea from you. (:
  • Posted By: xKiv  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

      Quote "munk":  

      Quote "crashnburn11":  

    If we really want to get stuck on the whole pay to win thing drones probably shouldnt get sold for peen in yoobey either, that is far more of an unbalanced benefit than an iotm will ever be.



    heh, I got that idea from you. (:



    When two do the same thing, it's not the same thing.
  • Posted By: crashnburn11  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

      Quote "munk":  

      Quote "crashnburn11":  

    If we really want to get stuck on the whole pay to win thing drones probably shouldnt get sold for peen in yoobey either, that is far more of an unbalanced benefit than an iotm will ever be.



    heh, I got that idea from you. (:



    I have no qualms with it, but this seems a silly thing to complain about compared to that
  • Posted By: Rickton  homeworld | blog | gallery | player profile

    I guess I shouldn't have said "pay to win" because everyone else is right, a lot of IOTMs are extremely useful and give big advantages to those who have them. The ore de-randomizer is practically a must-have...although only "practically," before it was introduced we used to just spend a bunch of kits to get the ore we want and that's still possible.
    There are even some that have unique mechanics not available anywhere else: the UE card, the dissassemblers, the seeker orb, and debatably the bounty device.
    But I dunno, I just feel like attacking facilities would be a game-changer, and not being able to do it would effectively put you at a pretty big disadvantage. I guess since it is a team game, one person not having it wouldn't matter as much, but still.
    As for munk selling drones for peen, I'm assuming those are the drones he made legitimately through his experiments, not magicked into existence, so I see that as only slightly worse than another player selling drones for peen.

    About the "pets escape rather than die" idea, I'm with crash. Taking people's facilities should put the hurt on their production capabilities, give them a reason to want to fight to take them back. With this change, it's just a temporary inconvenience before their pets come back.
    If the pets escaped on facility destruction rather than dying that'd be slightly better, because it would still take them out of commission for a pretty long period of time.