Round 20 Review
 

I'd like to have a discussion about how round 20 went, focussing on a few key areas:

Etd
Clusters
free/paid accounts

I'd like to focus on the top level issues rather than specifics so for example with Etd, I'd like a discussion on their existance rather than one on the poor ship stats.

Most of round 21 is now set in stone (other than ship stats), so this will be primarilly be about informing roun 22 development.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Etd - Went well but did mean there were less targets of each class so attacking was slightly harder but this encouraged more varied fleet makeups.

Clusters - Pointless. Due to exiles I was in 3 or so clusters and only 1 seemed to half function for a week or 2. Remove for next round/round 22 in my opinion

Free/Paid - Not enough reason to pay if you are not a heavy player.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

How can you not take in account shipstats when roughly 90% of a rounds experience is decided by how well or poor they are designed. I don't really see the point in the Etd race to begin with, we've had enough problems balancing out shipstats with 4 races, let alone trying it with 5. It didn't add anything in terms of gameplay, except for a short exciting period where they were 'new'. Overall they were far to powerfull with faking options due to cloaking and their pods being a bitch to stop, and next to that they had a ton of racial bonusses aswell just making them too good compared to any of the other races.


Clusters were usually rather pointless, it was either a full cluster nap where ppl happily idled along or a split cluster where the strong galaxies simply used the weaker galaxies as farm. Add to that the inability of alliances to cover incluster incomings properly and the problems are there :-). This also due to the stats practically forcing ppl to attack to avoid falling behind on the XP whores too much, which leads to even less defence being available and thus less chance on getting alliance help for incluster (unless you ofc have members in the same cluster).


Free and paid accounts difference isn't really notable, i still don't get why free accounts have been upgraded to be able to mine 2000 roids though, its as if you are encouraging ppl not to upgrade as apart from engineering and scans there isn't a real reason to pay. Too bad it doesn't seem a viable option to actually make coded differences between paid and unpaid accounts (like simply limiting the income they get from roids, works far better if you ask me).

Re: Round 20 Review
 

talking about the number of races and how it impacts on stats balencing is fine, I just want to avoid rants about how bad the actual stats were, becuase we know they were bad.

Wandows: what would you suggest the roid limit for free accounts should be?

Also its worth noting that free accounts were improved by design, we wanted to make it possible to be competive without paying.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Etd
nice playble XP race and due to a short round a very good option
problem this round is that every race has 2 weak classes where you cant even selfcover youself agasint a top 1k planet.

Clusters were very nice in the start but mainly developed in 2 things

Lazy clusters (almost all gals napped or no naps at all)
Aggressive clusters (only few planets napped leading to incs and cluster members not defending own gal members)

Def in cluster was hardly seen
Cluster are nice so should maybe be extended (bigger BPs would make a gal more controllable and also the BP would see the need of playing for the cluster)

For me my cluster was just a huge farm
Ask all there



free/paid accounts
nfi :)

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Since alliances are smaller and less players around clusters aren't really used much unless an alliance dominates it. Ships are mainly used on attacks or to defend allaince/gal mates and not those who just happen to be in the same c-alliance.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

See cluster 8 for my opinion on clusters :/

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Reintroducing clusters was (and still is) a good overall idea. Even if clusters develop into different directions (the ones Sjor pointed out), they are still good for people to go to and try to create more ties between people. They might need some more pondering though, f.e. people in inactive galaxies were still pretty much screwed if they never managed to get to know about a possible cluster alliance.

Eitrades - was an addition that made me go "wtf?". The game has other problems which have to be sorted first before you can consider adding more races, f.e. the combat engine, and therefore the ship stats, can hardly manage 4 races (as it was already pointed out correctly) - as such the introduction of a 5th race to me is more like a sign to want to do something but without really considering the overall impact of it. Imho the only reason it was implemented was probably to have the marketing-ability to say "something great" was introduced.

Free/Paid accounts can be kept as they are, imho. Admittedly, I haven't played a free account this round, but from the paper it looks like an alternative to go (even though you lack engineering).

Re: Round 20 Review
 

So how could we improve clusters?

Some have suggested that 6 races is the optimum for ease of balencing, would you agree?

Re: Round 20 Review
 

God no, what is wrong with 4 races. if a 6th race is introduced, surely number of ships per race would have to be lowered?

Re: Round 20 Review
 

I know you said you didn't want it to be a discussion on shipstats, but I feel that is where the most major problem in the design of this round lay, but I am referring to the basis on which the shipstats seemed to be designed.

Basically it seems that, with designing ship stats, the current approach in PA-Team is "balance is achieved through everybody having a massive imbalance".

For example, Xans simply have nothing they can do about bs/cr incomming, Etd's and caths have very little they can do about proper fi incomming (cath less so - and I am referring to xans who build purely fi and the odd wraith due to there being no point whatsoever in building anything else). Now, I don't feel this is an issue with this particular set of stats, I think it is a symptom of a more widescale problem within the approach of PA Team to game design. It seems to me that everything that is worked out, 'tweaked' and 'balanced' (lol) is done by trying to give everyone a massive strength and everyone a massive weakness, and just swapping round the areas. This is ultimately a flawed approach is at means a great big 1mil value xan can be roided by a tiny 200k Etd without the Etd having to put in any thought/effort beyond the mind-numbingly obvious "It's a Xan - send BS". If he does this, unless there is defence, he gets roids.

This is what the game has now descended into. Gone are the days when a player could spend half an hour tweaking his fleet to get the least losses for the most gain, and when a player could build ships to defend himself rather than having to rely on external defence. Gone are the days that a person could spend half an hour analysing the defence that'sbeen sent, and find out that, despite extra losses, it would still be a profitable land.

There is no uncertainty left in the game. The formulae now for the game (to take an example from this round) is:

Etd BS + Xan = Xan roided
Etd BS + Xan + Defence = Etd recalls

This isn't just with stats either. Everything has been overly simplified and had huge gaping holes poked in it under the patronising banner of helping new players - the very same new players that play advanced RTS games and other FAR FAR FAR more complex games than PA ever was. The only complex part of PA was politics, and that is complex proportional to the size of the player base, so by making the game so unbearably shit to so many people, PA Team have helped in making it simpler by shrinking the player base.

There is no longer any level of skill or thought to put into playing the game - attacking now is simply a lottery. You look for the right race to attack, you ignore all but the planet and surface scan because what ships they have is irrelevant - they're twice your size, but you know their race so that's enough to know if you can get through. You look at the planet scan to see how many roids they have, and you look at the surface scan to see how easy it is to JGP them. You then rub your lucky talisman, sacrifice a small child to the God Of Sleep in the hope of pleasing him into sending hostile DC's into the land of nod and launch your fleet. If there is defence, you recall. If there isn't, you get free (or practically free) roids. ALl of that without even putting any thought or effort in. The game is mindless now, only defence and race dictates who you can land on.

The game needs to be more dynamic really, this irrational obsession with absolutes need to be turned around, there shouldn't be an obvious right/wrong to everything, if there is we're not playing a game, we're simply all paying to be part of a massive number crunching exercise where every now and then someone either sleeps or gets drunk and cocks the whole thing up. The absolutism is getting into every part of the game, I've already mentioned at length the absolutism of who you do and don't attack, the absolutism of whether or not you land, the absolutism of whether or not you win or lose combat (I only implied this one - but there is no happy medium where both sides get a bloody nose - now one side gets maimed and the other comes out like an airbrushed hollywood action hero). There is another example of this in the game too:

Scans: You absolutely don't get through or you absolutely do. A system with a percentage chance of getting through based on amps/distorters would be so much better. it would mean players can play themselves without having to rely on a scanner being available at the necessary time. It's good that the game can be played in more than one way with the concept of scanners becoming so essential, but scanner is a workhorse job where you are never going to get first place. By having a percentage chance of getting through, everybody has a chance of getting scans through, and so the absolute of whether or not a scanner is online is irrelevant to winning the game.

Add this issue with scans in, and you see that the way to do well in the game is simple:

1. You pick a race and build only the ships that get you through on the appropriate race.
2. You aim for a target twice your size or bigger that's appropriate race.
3. You put all the aforementioned ships into a fleet, type in the coordinates and press the "free easy roids" button at the bottom of the missions page (I think it might be called something slightly different).
4. You come online at the appropriate time, and pray to the god of all that's holy that there is a scanner there, if there is, you get a scan, if there isn't you recall.
5. If the god of all that's holy smiles on you and provides you with a scanner, you pray for all your worth whilst the scanner is working his magic that the gods are smiling on you still and the scan will show no defence. If it does, you land, if it doesn't you recall/
6. At the time of incomming, you report to your alliance, beg your gal and feel despair at your cluster whilst praying that you haven't used up all the gods favour in your attacks, and that defence will be provided.

That is how the game now works. The important question here is:

How is this anything other than just a slightly different take on Bingo?

Answer?

Well, buggered if I know.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

That is something I am pondering about :) So far I couldn't come up with anything except for some kind of "coded cluster alliance" solution, which needs a hell of a lot more pondering.

Without knowing those people's reasoning? No.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

6 races = 2 pod's of each class, which makes it easier to balence out attack fleets.

i.e. if number of races = number of classes balencing is easier.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Oh, and in case anyone missed it or couldn't be arsed to read the novel I just wrote and wants a summary:

The problem is not a niggling little issue with a certain part of the game. It is a major fault with the fundamental approach to game design.

Still, it was good to see Kal admitting that the stats aren't very good.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

It would also mean there would be more defships, particularily more 0 loss defships.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Zero loss defships really bias the game a lot in favour of an xp player. Xp players either get enough def versus them that stops their landing being a score gain. Value players have exactly the same thing but their concern is far more with value gain. They won't take 50k value loss, 20% of their fleet for a 50k score gain from xp where an xp player can quite easily take a 50k value loss, 50% of their fleet for a 200k score gain from xp. Obviously this isn't exactly how it works but it is an illustration of the law of unintended consequences rearing its ugly head.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Clusters, in my opinion, need to be bigger - they are currently far too concentrated.

Etd was a good idea but the stats are so terrible it hasn't really worked out.

As my paid account is free i'm not one to talk here.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

20 galaxies in a cluster? more?

Re: Round 20 Review
 

to get cluster to defend each other and work well togheter you could make just the galaxys on your sides make the cluster defence bonus.

so if you are in galaxy 4:3 only galaxy 4:2 and 4:4 whould have the travel time bonus.

galaxy 2:1 whould then this whould workhave the galaxys 2:2 and 2:10 (if 10 is the highest)as their def buddys.

this will make galaxys in cluster work togheter even if the galaxys on your sides are not great ,they are the only outside your gal that can make it in time.

i like clusters but they dont work like they used to do,i think this will make clusters better.

x3

Re: Round 20 Review
 

I like that idea torstein, maybe that needs to be investigated further.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Clusters

I don’t think we should have cluster bonuses but rather parallel bonuses. This would allow for more galaxies to be involved and most likely we would see the forming of two cluster alliances fighting for dominance. This would most likely put an end to the simple Galaxy nap to everyone in a cluster routine, and would also limit the pain of being excluded from a P alliance since instead of 1 or 2 galaxies being excluded and pounded into submission it would be spread out amongst more galaxies allowing for oppositions to form. There is also the option to force cluster to be defensive by allowing the defense bonus in clusters and the attack bonus in parallels. This spreads out the attacking amongst many galaxies and with the smaller defense pool one would be unwise not to form a true defensive alliance with your cluster.

Races

I think a general out line of the races is needed so the variance in stats from round to round isn’t so wonky. Traditionally Terran is high armor and high EMP resistance across the board. They have the added benefit of players as being used as EMP flak in defenses adding another layer to the game play depth. Yet for some reason Terran is the worst race this round for EMP. Hard set outlines for each race must be created and maintained, and the natural rivals of each race should be kept each round. A sixth race would be fine in my opinion, how ever it must be distinctive, and I fail to see how that can be done with the current game mechanics.

ETD

The biggest problem with ETD from where I stand is that they have other races technology and although they are adapting new technologies they have no learning curve? The ships of ETD are on par with the other races who are have these ships naturally. They should be second class to the natural races and not already over lap existing ships IE Vendor and Beetle. For example if the natural damage cost of an xan ship is going to be 40 - 50 then the ETD cloaked ships should not exceed the 40 threshold and should honestly suffer a 10% adaptation penalty making all ETD cloaked ships having a 36 DC. However due to ETD’s heritage being from Terrans who have naturally high armor it would make sense to increase the armor cost of the ETD cloaked ships slightly above that of the xan. IE 10% higher ETD armor on Cloaked ships compared to XAN armor so if Xan armor is 30 - 40 then I would suspect ETD armor to be in the 40 - 44 range on cloaked ships. The above are guidelines applied once racial lines are drawn in an outline of what should be the avg and spread of DC and AC for a races ships.

A note on Ziks

I think if we are going to keep the POOFING of the steal ships then we need to find a way for ZIK to profit slightly from stealing. Keeping both armor and damage costs in the 50 and above category is a must as it allows for profits to be taken if a ZIK can figure out exactly how much to send in order to kill more with his high DC than the fleet value he sends. This continues to make ZIK a thinking mans race. However more importantly I feel like ETD having the trading bonus is enough on it’s own. I feel the salvage bonus should be applied to ZIK giving them more salvage on defense when there ships disappear. Since, really it is there loss of ships being cu t up and shared by all other defenders.

SCANS

I STRESS that all planets should start with basic scans that are needed to attack. FORCING people to rely on scanners is a joke and the PATEAM should feel shame in making it so god damned difficult for a player to play solo and do well let alone a new player joining the game having to fall so far behind by researching scans while everyone else researches more important techs. New players and Solo players are already behind the 8 ball anyways with no alliance to support them and once they enjoy the game they will naturally seek out alliances and join the greater community. Putting such a harsh restraint on them is ridiculous. Basic scans needed for attacking are IMO Planet scans and Unit Scans news scans. News scans are complicated however so something like a limited JGS that can only see eta 1 ships would be preferable. Then the rest of the scan tree would go Surface, Tech, News, Full JGS FA, the AU.

On a side note

I think a fourth fleet spot should be added. My only fear is that this is overly powerful in the hands of xan for fake attacks and defense, and ETD for fake def as well. Personally I think ZIK need the fourth slot because the way their value is always so chopped up into so many ship classes. Perhaps this would be away to balance out ziks poofing, by providing only them with the coveted fourth fleet?

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Strangly i like this idea. I have enjoyed the clusters been re-introduced, but i also beleive with the memberbase so low it is not as fun as it used to be. So maybe this idea would be useful.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

hmm, so sort of proper geography within the cluster - that would be very interesting... and it would force you to have defence pacts etc...

Re: Round 20 Review
 

defenders need to get more xp !!

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Yes but how should defenders get more Xp?

Perhaps it should work based on value? So Value of attacking fleet destroyed divided amounst defenders? With a modifyer to lessen the amount gained per asteroid captured. This makes pure emp def kinda crappy, but then emp def in this model could be abused so unless it was 1/4 fleet value held to take into account possible abuse and the likely hood of attackers to land on pure emp def anyways?

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Etd: interesting idea, but hard to give a fair shake with these crap stats. More races could be more interesting however. Difficult to totally dismiss them in their first round.

Clusters: I like them, but seemed they were just all NAP'd, which is boring...though so were alliance "politics" this round, which could have something to do with it.

Free/Paid: I played a freebie account this round, and I can't think of any changes I'd make to them. Very playable, well done :)

Re: Round 20 Review
 

maybe a way for MoW to set 2/3 galaxies within the cluster as defence pact galaxies. because if you would have a proper geography within the cluster it would require 2 channels of communication and if you would set 2/3 'friendly gals' you could still set up one channel of communication.

this would also be better for alliances because if you for instance have 3 galaxies with a high number of member in 1 cluster you would want them to operate more closely

Re: Round 20 Review
 

There is some very good constructive critisizm in this thread, I applaud those who have responded and not bashed Kal and the PA Team.

I think clusters are a wonderful thing, even if they havn't really been exploited this round. If we want to go to any of the varients suggested in this thread I would agree it would be worth trying.

I also agree with Troll that more fleet slots would be beneficial to the game if properly thought through.

The free/paid balance was excellent this round and I don't feel it should be modified.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

how to improve clusters?
i would say improve gals, if gals work well the cluster will also do
so if a gal has 5 ppl from a bp and it joins a cluster ally its very unlikely that the gal will get a lot of cluster incs on the "unprotected" planets

from what i can see is that the game became less and less a community game but a solo game

Alliances have it harder and harder to play (maybe it’s the reason less and less hardcore alliances play)

The current score system
It makes a solo planet very powerful. If one decent planet leaves a top 3 ally now it changes their rank immediately and there is nothing the ally can do


The current value/xp/stats system makes value play suck. Each race has at least 2 weak points and a lot of people playing for xp allow only def lechers to keep their roids and play for value. Rest stays on the road.


I would suggest BP of 5 or even private gals of 8 people
Ability to be member of several tags (cluster ally, bg, friends, ally)
More tools for the alliances (incs visible if in tag) also approval if some1 leaves ally or at least the score to be kept

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Etraides:
Didn't really add anything to the game. This game lives from balancing - and it is difficult enough to mix 4 races with such a fundamental difference in attack style. I'd even go as far and reduce to 3 races for stats sake.

Clusters:
Right now I a get attack #10 and #11 from some dedicated noob basher 230% times my value in cluster - where with 6 gals left (2 big, 2 med, 2 small) decided to farm the 2 medium ones. One of the medium ones disbanded (everyone had to selfexile which was expensive). In my case I had to self-exile 8 times and finally got stuck in the other medium gal of the very same cluster (after wasting 12M res for it - but that is a different story).
In my first cluster (which was ok but I had to leave due to inactive gal) there were some ppl willing to make an effort - for a while there was actively attacks organized - which was dropped after a week coz ppl can't really attack with cluster and alliance.
Clusters are very starter unfriendly - when they fail you have lost and there is nothing you can do about it. I know you don't really like alliances Kal but they give you a much more consistent gameplay experience. They have the community - they have organized attacks and defences and most important people that are willing to give up a lot of their time to help.
The focus now is too much on galaxies. At start of round it is 60% luck if u end up in an ok or better gal mid-round it is 80% luck. You cannot choose your gal - you cannot choose your cluster - but you can choose your alliance.
So either drop clusters or, make sure that clusters and galaxies are more equal or make it an easier option to choose your gal and cluster (I understand that it will cost me 4998693 metal, 4998693 crystal and 4998693 eonium <--) .
I ain't exactly new to this game and had a lot of bad rounds. Yet I never been as close to quitting the game for good due to the frustrating fact that there is nothing I can do to improve my situation or the situation of my gal.

Free Accounts:
They are finally playable - which is good. What exactly am I paying for again? :P

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Definately, 3 races is the perfect compromise between available options and good balance. The more you add, the harder it will be. With 3 races, you can always keep to a rock, paper, scissors sheme, as long as it's not balanced, and it will still be kind of balanced, because overall, it will be fair. From the second you add a 4th race, or even 5th, you can still keep to rock, paper, scissors, in a circle, but you will have connections between races not defined in that sheme, so you will have to have the balance perfect between those, which is much harder to realize.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Except with a circle scheme you would need equal numbers of players of each race with players of all levels or 1 race will have more or less targets than others. Therefore this system can't really work.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

I want a zik race back that can actually steal some gains on attacks and not just on salvage when defending.

Goddamn its been boring this round - zero FC action as it wasnt worth it.

Whos the brainchild that came up with the idear of making FCing a unviable way of play? It was killer fun in R19 but totally been missing in R20.

Bring back mah zikz!!!

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Etd: It was fun to play it, but defence on xan Fi and Ter/zik De was very hard. So a lot of uncovered calls.
I think a 6th race universe would be a very fun way to play.

Clusters: Get the BP for a gal on 6, so you get more stronger controlled gals. From that stronger cluster alliance will be maked. This way cluster aint working.

free/paid accounts. No reason to pay for a 3 man bp. A 6 man bp is a reason to pay for. There for we pay, to be in a gal with friends, so let us be.
Private gals are much better. a 10 man gal. with 4 random is oke aswell.

Extra note. I would like to see back that you can def everybody with eta -1. And you ally def will be eta -2, same as cluster defence eta -2. In such a low playerbase you need all your friends help. And if you don't are in a ally you can still ask your friends for defence.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Its said time and time but honestly .. an XP reform has to be due.

How a planet can have less than 300k value and be 4th place is a joke.

It shows no skill other than being able to attack someone double your size - easily done with a focused fleet of pure podclass. (is that a skill?!)

Couple with a stats problem (etd?) it means any idiot can get in the top 10.

---

I agree with Walldo on the cluster issues - its a license for a cluster alliance or galaxy to bash one particular galaxy, with greatly reduced chances of defence, and no solution for the victim but self exile. Stronger BPs would help, but it's still an issue. Some thought required here, because I like the idea, but its not working as well as standard alliance based PA.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Stronger BPs would not help. The weaker galaxies that have no representatives from the strong alliances (today, mainly the top3) are victimized no questions asked, and unless they contain some influential people able to reach out, their role is to farm roids for the cluster or to piss off.

This has been the role of clusters or parellels each round they've been introduced. On very few occasions, a functional cluster pact is formed. Most of the time, it's lunch time and we all know who will be eaten.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Takes certainly more skill than all those top10 value players farming planets 1/3rd their value in cluster due to the completely useless bashing protection.

Problem this round ain't with XP but with ridiculous Etd pods twice the cost of its flak.

Couldn't agree more - yet the piss off doesn't really work either with the inability to ever disband a gal and the self-exile cost skyrocketing unless you are lucky.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Etd could just as well be gone again imho. I agree with those who pointed out that balancing was hard and often failed before, leave alone with a 5th race.
Especially since this round did not only show imbalanced stats, but stats that were SO crap that any halfdecent player cant but lose his faith in the guys running this game. Because the outcome of this round really wont convince anyone of "the managers" having any clue about their product.


Clusters
Useless, but not destructive either. Imho, quickly set-up total cluster naps are a clear vote of players against the existance of clusters. Its seen as a threat, rather than an opportunity apparently - and treated as such.


Free/paid accounts
Works out pretty well as far as i can see.
On a sidenote: will you apologize to those who paid for these stats?

Re: Round 20 Review
 

clusters
make the galaxies private* again and only allied galaxies get the eta advantage (no eta advantage for alliance def or cluster attack)

race
try to make more combos that are playable, maybe also increase the targetting from 1 class to 2 classes?

*- 7man private gals and 15man random gals. with the free accounts being very playable a private/random system sounds nice to me, and since there are almost no fresh blood most people are well established in alliances. also, the alliance system can be changed to only galaxies joining the alliance(1 alliance per galaxy). discuss.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Would require a revamp of the combat engine - will not happen.

And if it would happen, it would be reasonably wise just to redesign the whole piece of shit. The current cow-sized bugs in the combat engine are "word" enough of it.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

well its easier to just quit playing than to see how the admins can noob it again,,

:)

edit:: "Most of round 21 is now set in stone (other than ship stats), so this will be primarilly be about informing roun 22 development."

i somehow like the sound of that haha gal 1:1 fights 2 more gals r22

Re: Round 20 Review
 

The only way to properly sort incluster bashing (with no viable way of defence against FI/CO) is to do things like they were done previously - no FI pods, and ETAs stack like:
FI - eta-3
CO/FR - eta-2
DE/CR - eta-1
BS - full eta

Re: Round 20 Review
 

it went fi, co, fr/de, cr/bs by the way (as opposed to co/fr, de/cr etc)
way to remember it: terran fr/de were same eta's etc etc and out of prot attacking with xans involved xans landing first etc :o

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Drop Etd and use a successful set of previous stats.

Having the same stats two rounds in a row would be excellent imo, because at the end of the day changing the stats every round doesnt change the game, it's just an inconvenience to learn it all again.

It would give people a chance to learn from one rounds mistakes, and to make more informed race choices too.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Given that the current level of skill required to do well (and by this I mean get pretty lucky with regards to a galaxy, search for race x with y roids and claim it) I think having to learn a new set of stats is actually good for the game.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Clusters being too small at the moment can easily be solved by removing clusters and re-introducing paras. That way you aren't dependant on the number of clusters in the universe which is dynamic round-to-round, but upon the static 10 paralells.

Common sense dictates it be wiser to fix the problems of a round during the next upcoming round?

PS Keiz: the game will die before it's fesible to re-design the combat engine. We're still waiting on Planetarion:Next (PAN), correct? Shouldn't round 20 and further have been called PAXX?

Re: Round 20 Review
 

There don't have to be 10 para's its a simple config change to have a different number. But there seems to be some debate over whether more galaxies in a "cluster" would be a good thing or not.

Yes and no, if problems are identified early enough then they can be fixed for the following round. But problems identified late can't allways be dealt with for the next round as it would mean changing the development plan in a signifcant way. For round 21 we are now really into the test phase all the key coding has been completed, so this is not the time to suddenly embark on a major change. If there are quick and easy things that can be done its not a problem, but anything that would require either significant coding or significant testing time cannot be done.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

of course there should be more galaxies in a cluster, being so small as it is now, it's pretty useless :/

Re: Round 20 Review
 

I've decided the cluster will never work well - revert ETAs to r19 style.

Re: Round 20 Review
 

Successful attacks seem to be fewer and farther between this round. Probably a function of the ever-declining player base meaning fewer and fewer good galaxies for alliances to target...leading to ridiculous amounts of piggying.

you want action? get more players. it doesnt matter whether or not its 10 or 20 galaxies in a cluster nearly as much as if we have a GROWTH IN PLAYERS.