Universe Restart?

[Deantwo]

wondering when this universe restart is happening?

The answer would be "when it is ready".

But I guess doing it 2020-01-01 would be nice too. Assuming all the issues we come up with here gets fixed before that.

[Deantwo]

But I guess doing it 2020-01-01 would be nice too. Assuming all the issues we come up with here gets fixed before that.

Also important. Are we all in agreement that there won't ever be a Universe 7?

It is hard to sell Hazeron as a MMO if we are gonna have the fear of a sudden reset hanging over our heads.
Universe 5 lived for a long time, so assuming some of all the balances issues we discussed here are fixed, we should be able to have Universe 6 running for even longer or forever.

Still would like to see a separate thunderdome galaxy/box that resets every couple months or so. A few have suggested it should have a victory condition, for example in the form of some ringworld that all have to be controlled by a single empire for x amount of time.

[Phenoix12]

Also important. Are we all in agreement that there won't ever be a Universe 7?

More major updates may eventually cause the need for a server reset at some point.  It's hard to tell...  Code reworks, new content, natural desasters destorying the server bank, who knows what'll happen in the future.

[Deantwo]

Also important. Are we all in agreement that there won't ever be a Universe 7?

More major updates may eventually cause the need for a server reset at some point.  It's hard to tell...  Code reworks, new content, natural desasters destorying the server bank, who knows what'll happen in the future.

That is what careful planning is for, and backups.

Would you expect EVE Online or World of Warcraft to suddenly reset? I doubt they would be as popular if they randomly reset at random.

[Celarious]

Personally I would be for something with both hard and soft limits and a drastically shrunk galaxy with more dynamic growth instead (one star per sector past a certain point, 0 stars or just limited a bit after that / dark matter monsters / whatever), and for dynamic growth, bring in new galaxies as player needs demand, with creation of black holes and wormholes between them (not just the central black hole, though that could be a centralized galaxy transport: we need some others I think too, that dont necessarily have to connect to another galaxy).

Just wanted to say I highly agree with this! A smaller galaxy initially means players aren't spread too thin and contact with other empires is possible, and bringing in more galaxies as needed would work for when more players join! In terms of the limits, I think the sector density should become one system per sector when you're far enough out, and then 0 stars per sector when you go a bit further out than that. This would help to prevent people from making cities too far out and also make the galaxy feel more alive.

Great suggestions overall!

[martianant]

Some more thoughts of mine and others on the discord as we got to talking:

The next universe should have a bit of a different galaxy structure. We were thinking fewer, smaller galaxies. Like 3-4 galaxies that are more on the scale of 1000-2000pc across instead of 5k like the shores galaxy. It would also be neat if they were close enough to show up in the skybox, and if possible make warping between them possible. Although I think that should take a very long time, so that the intergalactic wormholes are still a highly valued option. The idea behind this is that the local cluster is on a "collision course" hence why the galaxies are all close. The fewer, smaller is due to just the current player counts not really justifying the amount of space. If the game gets a huge influx of players (hopefully one day!!) then we can always add more galaxies as we need them.

Additionally the 'structure' of a galaxy in a sense should change a bit. At some point system generation should stop completely, so that only empty sectors are made with 0 systems at some distance away, like 1000pc or such, and outside of the 'galactic plane' ringworlds should not spawn. So if the galaxy is ~11 sectors thick (5 above the plane, 5 below), then ringworlds only spawn in z -5 to 5, and going above or below that the single systems will never be ringworlds. This would prevent people from finding a ringworld 5000 million pc away or something and using it to teleport back and forth to skirmish and pillage with no real way to reach or find them. It would still allow for some colonies far off, to show that nice galaxy in the skybox, but it wouldn't be a strategic advantage due to the lack of ringworlds so the only way to travel is warp and deal with the warp times.

There was also talk about making 'terrain' of sorts, regions of space with special properties. Nebulas that block sensors really well, so from the outside they are quite unknown. Areas with higher concentrations of rare elements or something. Maybe some regions are more likely to have higher quality resources, and other regions are more likely to have lower quality resources. Stuff like that. We don't have strategic resources of any kind but those would also be a neat thing to add in to this. The idea behind this is making space have meaning, so that the Gorlon Nebula isn't the same as every other nebula, maybe something about it makes it more valuable. And the fact it's a nebula makes it different than any normal region of space. Right now all regions of space are pretty much the same. This could even tie into the different galaxies nicely, and could mean adding end game content to galaxies that are 'harder' (more pirates, space monsters, etc) if they were the only places certain resources spawned for end game stuff. Would give a reason to fight over certain regions if they are more valuable, promoting more conflict.

Another idea was having stellar black holes (the ones that spawn around the galaxy, not the supermassive one) generate wormholes that link to other stellar black holes in that galaxy. This would allow fast long range travel around the galaxy, and make these systems more valuable as well. It makes sense as well that small (stellar) black holes link small (with in the galaxy) distances, while huge (supermassive) black holes link vast (other galaxies) distances. This is a very, very good idea and is super cool!

I also suggested that ships should drop some of their cargo/ammo when destroyed, and the officer log could go in this "wreck" object so that you could actually recover these. As it stands officer logs seem just to fly off and are basically impossible to collect. This would also enable piracy of ships even if the ships never stand down, although you'd over ever get a fraction of what's in the hold. If you've heard/seen Eve Online this is what happens when a ship gets destroyed. The idea would be if the cargo hold has 5 items of varying quantities, there is a percentage chance of dropping each. It's a bit of a curve so there is usually at least something. At the very least the officer log should always drop.

[Moghom]

I vote for a Restart; Welcome, sixth universe!

[AnrDaemon]

What should be actually thought through before restart is a core gameplay mechanics/interactions.
The current state is just a bad mess of hardly explained sideeffect.
Old mechanics, being very simple, visible, understandable and easily explained, allowed for rich gameplay content, because they were not so limiting, encouraging creativity, and overall allowing for things to happen, actually creating the so-called "emergent gameplay".

[tophattingson]

I advocate for a pizzabox-shaped galaxy. Similar to "The Box", but flatter and wider. Something like 50x50x5 sectors, instead of 9x9x9. The smaller galaxy should encourage player interaction beyond the hide and grief activity that dominates empire-empire interactions when the players are spread out. This would also mean only one galaxy. The aim should be to have a roughly even mix of inhabited and uninhabited areas, so the pizza box should be expanded should playercount suddenly increase.

As for the shape? Consider the two reasons:
1. For an equal-volume galaxy, you get a greater corner to corner distance.
2. 3d space is confusing. It's easier to understand claimed regions of space when they don't overlap in the z axis.

Slightly more controversial: Defensive positions at chokepoints make for good gameplay. Warp/deadhead does not allow chokepoints - empires can be attacked at any system at any time. The wormhole network should be improved by buffing the number of wormholes per system to make it easier to navigate, and deadhead/warp either removed or reduced to a scouting role. There's a reason wormholes or other strict system to system paths are used in many space strategy games.

More controversial: Conditional on Hazeron eventually coming to a wider audience on steam, I want to see some division between ownership at a local level and ownership at an empire level. I want a two-tier system where cities are owned by a specific mayor first and owned by an empire second. Wars between empires should change who owns the cities but not change the local government of the cities, inherently. This would allow for an intermediate role of a local governor who runs a domain somewhere on a scale between that of a city and a few systems, and not particularly care what specific empire lords over them. I suspect there's a lot of people who would enjoy a role where they manage their own little corner of space without the constant risk of having their city removed from their hands just because the empire they're a part of can't be assed to defend it. This would also make Empires more like true Empires: It usually leaves local officials in charge of areas it conquers and is decentralised. A further advantage is that it would allow individuals who are part of an Empire to grow their own power base and perhaps split off into their own new empire should the opportune moment arise.

(Has anyone here played CK2? If so, think what happens to counts when the title of King changes hands: They might not like the new king, but generally they get to keep their position)

While the current permission system of empires does sort of allow them to play the game as above, it only would happen if they chose to deliberately do so. I think if would benefit gameplay if those players who govern cities do not have their work at risk of being destroyed immediately upon the owning empire of a city changing, but instead got the opportunity to continue as part of the new empire.

Likely my most controversial suggestion here is general disapproval of how the custom building system works. Custom models for buildings are fine, but being able to customise the functionality of the buildings is just a recipe for abuse. I much preferred it when a farm was just a farm, and a machine shop just a machine shop, for gameplay purposes. You shouldn't need to go into the building designer to put together a decent city.

[OriginalGangstaStaines]

Hello
I finally made an account.
For the record, the "Staines" account is Mortius.


Here's my.. testimony and recommendations based on almost a decade of the game. 
Firstly, let me preface this by saying that many of these recommendations have been made in the past, and while they were rejected by players in the past due to the frenzy of drama when Syndicate was an active empire in SOH - many of these people have entirely flipped their stances now and in fact, asked me to make an account to talk about my feelings on SoH.

Galaxy Scaling - A shared universe.
First off, player numbers, activity and social enjoyment of Hazeron has very much been proportional to the proximity of players to each other. This game thrives when people can interact, and while yes, there was a lot of drama in the past, most of those players that are still around on the Hazeron Discord are friends with each other and enjoy the history of the game. Some people are even dedicated keepers of the lore for the game, even almost 6 years on. 

When players spread out, as they did in late U4/U5 when new galaxies were added and the playable area expanded incredibly... galactic tensions dropped, galactic society became a hushed whisper, and boredom set in. -- Spreading players out causes social heat death of the universe. In order to vibe together, we need to be close enough to interact and have fun, conflict and trade with each other. The game is almost meaningless alone. 

Galaxy Scaling - Calculations and Numbers.
Many will remember "The Box". The infamous Box was the limited play area at the start of Universe 5. Although there was a lot of drama and conflict in The Box, it is now pretty fondly remembered by many, because it was one of the few times when anything interesting actually happened. Friends were made, lasers were pewed, and there was generally a lot more fun.

The Box was 9x9x9 sectors - so the loremasters have foretold.
-> At 300X in the galaxy, that gives us an average stellar density of approximately 23 systems per sector.
-> 9x9x9 sectors, this gives us 729 sectors total.
-> 729 sectors x 23 systems gives us a total of 16,977 systems, approximately. 
-> Syndicate required approximately 650 of these systems to supply full TL-32 
-> So... The Box could have easily supported around 10 Syndicates's, and a hundred minor empires too.
The Box, was, I think, the highest player count we ever had, and it easily accommodated us all. 

So, what went wrong?
This is up to interpretation. In my opinion, the Box was a poor shape. Due to the box being a relatively compact cube, warp travel was extremely quick, and huge fleets of ships could be anywhere in the box within a couple of hours travel. Additionally, due to the nature of the star maps, to our human brains it was difficult to determine territory when looking through 9Z levels of ownership. 

There is also the obvious Syndicate factor. Although in my opinion, a relatively considerate and civilly fought war, maybe people at the time thought we were bringing the apocalypse to the universe. This caused a huge amount of drama on the forums from people who, in hindsight, perhaps consider this a highlight. Sadly, in Shores of Hazeron there are virtually no empires with more than a couple of people working together, so counter balancing a titan like Syndicate is a very tall order. 


_____________________________________________________
_________________________________________________


So, what would I recommend?

I'd recommend a few things...

Scale the Playable Area for Playability
Scale the playable area in a way that encourages player interaction. To start with, a single galaxy of around 20,000 stars would be extremely sufficient, even extremely spacious for our current playerbase. A little distances helps people feel like they have some safety and room to grow, but they still need some neighbours to interact with. Creating a flatter, wider galaxy will let human brains make sense of a 3D area by making it more 2D-like. With a flatter galaxy, people have an easier time making sense of territory, politics and expansion. It also has the advantage of increasing travel time, especially if warp is given an substantial reduction.

There are three ways to do this;
1. Turn "The Box" into the Pizza Box at around 21x21x3 with 20,000 stars within a small section of a 600 sector wide image-generated galaxy - expand as needed. 
2. A small flat, wide disk/ellipse galaxy around 21x21x3 that thins out to 1 star per sector at the edges - create more galaxies as needed.
3. A small flat, wide disk/ellipse galaxy around 21x21x3 - expand X/Y axis by adding more star density and sectors around the edges as needed.

Resets can't be avoided due to development of other critical mechanics right now, but the universe should be designed to expand/contract based on player need.

System Permanence
I'm not sure if it still works this way but, with a smaller universe, there will be fewer star systems that could possibly be cached. For that reason, I'd recommend that when a system is generated, the information for that system is permanently logged by the servers, instead of the system regenerating worlds/qualities. This should create areas that are permanently desirable this has the benefit of creating legendary systems and regions and galactic terrain.

FTL Rework
Make smaller bigger. Create the perception of distance by rescaling the speed of ships travelling through the universe.

1. Slow down warp travel and maybe even remove it entirely as a separate drive type - instead relegate "Warp Travel" to being an inbuilt system-to-system function of the Gravity Manoeuvre Drive that is approximately 10x the speed of light, but only outside of a gravity well entirely.
2. Revamp the wormhole drive and wormhole drive mechanics -- the only natural wormholes that exist are blackholes, all others must be temporarily generated by ships on the edge of the system gravity wells. Wormhole drives start with low-range and low-mass, but can get better latter on - this helps introduce players the galactic scales of Hazeron over time. Additionally, permanent wormhole gates could be generated WITHIN gravity wells by cities or stations in the inner systems. 

Give players the freedom to travel, but slower than before, and allow them to build up travel infrastructure. 

Alter the City Capturing Mechanics
I've been out of the game for a long time, so you're going to have to discuss this one yourselves - basically it seems like city capturing mechanics are still pretty bad. Strong defence is mostly based on exploits. Defence should be strategically favourable to the defender so that the strategic situation in the galaxy changes relatively slowly rather than entire empires falling in a day with little recourse. 






I don't plan on returning to the game, but I think it's great a lot of people still play and are passionately discussing improvements to it.