R58 Stats
 

I know It may seem early to start thinking about next round. But If we don't start now. Then it will start late. There has been talk about trying to setup a stats committee so we can brainstorm about next round stats. I and I would assume that most people would agree with this. So If you would like to be apart of the stats making for next round just post in this thread so we can get started working on a set of stats that best fits this community.

Re: R58 Stats
 

lets not make stats that "best fit the community" for a start. the reason this rounds stats are better than some others over the past 5-6 rounds is because of not giving in to community demands, the unpopular decisions that were made turned out fine.

i would like to sit on said stats committee. with the intentions of a 3 pod, MT stat round. much like the one just gone.

Re: R58 Stats
 

What, these stats are good!? 40 xans and 36 caths in the top 100. Talk about balanced.

Re: R58 Stats
 

I'd be happy to sit on a "stats commmittee" but I cba to make another set of stats on my own, balancing effs and emp is simply too boring.

Re: R58 Stats
 

i think it's widely known that stats don't make the t100. politics do

Re: R58 Stats
 

No blue_Esper if you look at the planets in the t100 they are not dominantly from one or two alliances like the rounds that politics plays a greater role. This round the t100 is a factor of the stats. Xan/ Cath are the 2 strongest races this round and that is also represented by the race distribution.

I personally would love to play in a ST or 90% ST round at most 2 ships per race that are T2, and IsilX the idea behind the comittee would be to estabolish what races are good vs and what classes are good vs others etc. Once that's estabolished then balancing the effs and e/r is very easy. I also would like to be on this comittee even through most of you hated my stats, if you compare them to the rounds around them they did have a much more even race distribution(not so much in the t100 but more in the distrubution((politics))

Re: R58 Stats
 

Some rounds politics heavily shapes the t100, other rounds not. I think it's pretty apparent this round that the stats have dictated the t100, not the politics.

Re: R58 Stats
 

the only bad race was Ter. if ter had been better then there would have been more of bother ter and etd and therefor more BS and BS is pretty much unstoppable.

and yes it has everything to do with politics.

Re: R58 Stats
 

How many people are you looking for to be on this committee? And how much of people's time do you think it will take? (my bet is the more people the more time it will take due to more arguments!)

I would be interested, though I must admit I cant be high up anyone's list of people to include. I should also note I don't particularly like heavily ST stats though a mix is fine.

Re: R58 Stats
 

Ideally prolly 5-6 people max. Anymore than that and as you said will just slow things down as everyone will have their opinions and will just be arguing over who's going to lead the committee.

And I agree had terran been a bit better, we'd have seen a greater mix in the t100 than just xan/cath but because xan fi was just too strong and terran not being able to def fi Ally eta means that it wont fit in a universe thats 30+% xan

Re: R58 Stats
 

I dont think xan was too strong because of fi (indeed cr has probably been their strongest attack fleet) but rather because of three pod types. When a target needs to cover against fake (even if just pods/padded) then it is much more difficult to cover against three classes of pod than just one or two. As a result I am sure most xans have capped a good number of their roids from fakes - often ones where two of their pod classes have been destroyed only for the third to get through.

Re: R58 Stats
 

I would like to be included but don't expect to be.

I think it's important to try and stick to the story of the races when making stats so I could help on that front.

Also this committee could be the ones to trial things in the game to see what works. Like on class sks, con stealers and other crazy kinds of things.

Appoco gave the impression that the stat maker/s could have a say on other areas of the game too so I would sensible trials of things like raised/lowered tag limits, cluster alliances, gov changes etc...

Re: R58 Stats
 

Ps. Please don't turn this into a troll of rd 57 stats use that thread for that. This is fresh

Re: R58 Stats
 

Currently the Group that I know of that has expressed interest are: Tia, Isilx, Kai, Blue_Esper, Santacruz. Which to me sounds like a perfect sized group. Obviously the committee wouldnt have total say over everything and we would still open to the community for help/suggestions. We should try and either start up a google.docs or some kind of group thread to try and get this nailed down.

When I have done stats by myself it usually takes about 100 hours to from start to final. With 5 people involved in this I imagine it will take about 50-60 hours per person over the course of about 3 weeks. So if we start Friday we would be done at sign up for R58.

Re: R58 Stats
 

IIRC when there were four races it was almost meant to be circular; Ter could hit cat due to high emp res, Cat could hit xan due to xan's lack of emp res, xan could hit zik due to inits, and zik would have their lower init ships able to take ter... or something like that!

Re: R58 Stats
 

It does not have everything to do with politics. As Tia said, politics plays a factor, but is not the deciding factor.

In my opinion it's about race distribution and your strategy. For example it is far easier for CO to land attacks in smaller teams than other classes.

Re: R58 Stats
 

My expression of interest did not count? Though it would relieve me of feeling I have to sign up regardless at the end of it all!

Re: R58 Stats
 

Ill step in for kai

Re: R58 Stats
 

Even with 5-6 other people i worry every time tia and stats are in the same sentence.

Re: R58 Stats
 

Please make the stats conducive to smaller attack teams.

I don't think encouraging lol waves is a good thing for the game.

Re: R58 Stats
 

Id like to be behind the stats one round.
Though i think my ideas of what stats would be interesting wouldnt be welcomed by the rest of the members of a commitee.
But im up for it.

Re: R58 Stats
 

I don't think lolwaves usually come about due to the stats. While there are probably some exceptions with very defensive stats in rounds like this one where the stats are quite good for attacking lolwaves come about because of the likelihood of alliance defence. This is something you cannot change with stats unless you make it so that almost all ships fire down classes not across or up... which would be very unusual!

Re: R58 Stats
 

Jesus Christ no.

Re: R58 Stats
 

Wow. I think I spent about 25 hours on my stats when I made mine, and half of that was probably ineffective and tedious emp/effs.

Re: R58 Stats
 

I think 1 person making the stats set, and then getting feedback from a small group of people who know what they're doing and then tweaking it a bit could work out well.

But a group of people starting from scratch and designing a set together seems like a terrible idea. Even with the detail and tweaking you already have a lot of different opinions, with designing a new set that will be far worse. Need 1 guy who has a vision of what he wants the stats to be, and puts in the work and makes the decisions, then some people who give feedback and different point of views so he can reconsider.

Re: R58 Stats
 

Idd the stats basic concept will take longer to be decided in a group. But they will gain when sharing the work load to make the stats ready.

Re: R58 Stats
 

This is what has happened every round for the last 10 rounds. The reason behind the committee is trying to make a set of stats that best suits the community wishes.

Re: R58 Stats
 

If your default alliance is based on your race: theoretically you could set Zik, Ter, Cat, Xan, Etd players all on a team against each other. Then we are talking five of them distributed uniformly. The question is would the scenarios play out in equilibrium over many trials and runs, is that what even makes for a good set of stats? Another question is planets have incentives not to attack their fellow race, except this rule does not go very far, when it matters at all; and so loyalty to races is always tertiary to locality and whatever alliances evolved.

Re: R58 Stats
 

My idea of a good set of stats is one where all 5 races are played evenly(or as close to even as possible) In the past 3 rounds we actually have seen about 10 FULL sized alliances each round. That give plenty of oppertunity for different strategies. When the stats are like they are this round it can never be a good round.

Re: R58 Stats
 

Tia "That give plenty of oppertunity for different strategies. When the stats are like they are this round it can never be a good round."

Not sure how you can say that Tia. Yes, there are more Xans/Caths in the uni then the other races, however, the strat choices for allys has been the most diverse it has been in a while. #1 Ult (Co), #2 BF (Fr/De), #3 FL (Cr)

Not 100% about the rest but almost all pod classes are being used in ally strats (except BS). So I would say this rounds stats were successful in terms of diversification of ally strats

Re: R58 Stats
 

See i actually think this rounds stats have been ok. Maybe in the end it was Terrans lack of anti co (mainly protection) that steered people away from them otherwise with more Ter/Etd BS in the round we would have had a lot more even distribution.

There is pluses and minuses for all types of stats MT/ST/Attacking/Defensive and i have come to dislike the mismatched stats that i once enjoyed. I think now we need to go down one path per round and maybe look to change the additional ships (SK/Res Stealers etc..) to play more of a part in the round and maybe edit the governments and bonuses each race gets so that they are less generic and more diverse, making the race choice more of a personal playstyle choice than something you are told to do by your HC's.

Maybe starting all the races off down different paths (maybe starting them at different research levels??) but having it so they all come together around tick 600-700 would be a good way to change how people pick race.

Thoughts would be:

Terran - Start with FR Hulls and 2 Core Completed.

Cat - Start with 2 Gates and 1 HCT Completed.

Xan - Start with 1 Gate 1 Infra and 5 Distorters completed***

Zik - Start with 3 Covops and 1 Core completed.

Etd - Start with 3 Scans and 5 Amplifiers completed.


*** Personally i would like to see Xan have to research Cloaking at the end of its Hull Research as i think its too OP compared to other 'special skills'. I think this would also take away some of the 'If Xan is playable it is OP' arguements too.

Re: R58 Stats
 

Indeed, if anything this round stats have been offensive minded, it's been very easy for all races to solo each other.

People just don't do that anymore in PA, when looking at the ally wars, it's always about 1000-1500% effeciency required, and attrition waves to suck ally def dry.

Re: R58 Stats
 

In my opinion it's almost impossible to make stats where all races are equally playable. With ziks stealing last, and people moaning when they have too many killships, caths having to have "just the right amount of emp", enormous amounts of whine about xan fi regardless of how they look, etd having emp/cloak/normal making them a pain in the ass to balance.

In my opinion zik is by far the hardest race to balance. In a way I'd really like a round without zik, but where every race gets a stealship(perhaps etd get 2 or 3).

Re: R58 Stats
 

Lets Break it down a bit for you then.

Ult: Cat Co(hmm 28% of uni is cath)/ etd co(only etd players in the universe so + for willy) Xan Fi/Fr(31% of uni) and some zik co to balance it out.

BF: 80% cath/xan Fr/De Still not following what you mean by diverse.

Faceless: Cat/Zik/Xan Cr once again still the cat/xan trend follows. Maybe if cath/xan hadn't been So appealing then other races would have been picked.

Ill even go further than that.

P3n 80% xan and a few caths sprinkled in.


If you look at the race breakdowns by ally EVERY ALLIANCE has majority cath/xan. Maybe a few zik's or a few etd/terrans but for the most part every alliance core is made up of cath and xan. And because of 3 pods stats they can all different strats. So because of the stats the way they were MADE! we have a round that is 60% cath/xan. That is not a politics choice that was a decision that many alliances made pre-round or at round start, and had the stats been balanced or a bit more fair we wouldn't have seen such a huge disparity between the races.

Re: R58 Stats
 

Re: R58 Stats
 

You wont get the races balanced in rounds like this unless you can make certain races/strategies VERY playable for smaller alliancces.
The stats im making atm is some mix of r51 stats where im doing some modifiacations.
You had the Apprime/TGV block going FR, the other contender that round was FAnG wich was CR/BS afaik, and you had smaller tags such as ODDR(Spore)/MegaROCK(Megalonia/ROCK) going CO.
In the end a lot of the top planets ended up as cath, maybe because the EMP resitances wasnt correctly adjusted to majority of the races, or by random luck.

Re: R58 Stats
 

because p3ng went xan a lot of people went cath to counter it, a quick check of uni page before round started showed that early doors xan had about 50% make up of uni, as xan have reapers you can effectively immune yourself to fi incs, and as to balance the def fleets in the alliance people needed the 2nd best anti fi race so the logical choice was to go cath. if we played again with these stats a small tweek to ter giving them a eta 7 based anti fi ship, they would not yield the same results in race numbers

Re: R58 Stats
 

Is structure killing still a viable option?

Re: R58 Stats
 

i dont see why it should be removed. i would like to see PDS instead of structure defense

Re: R58 Stats
 

This is correct, as it occurred we had an heated discussion about concerns that there was going to be too much xan cr about and we would be completely open to it as well as concerns that people would xp past reapers or team with cat co meaning we have little alliance def against them - the first has not really been the case (though cr incs are difficult) the second has proved correct. One of the big factors of the discussion was how much of the percentage of the Uni was us - when we were early on 1/3rd of the xans signed up it showed pretty clearly that it was the p3n alliance choice driving xan as the main chosen race rather than it necessarily being the best on paper.

On pds: I have always liked the idea of pds too - while the old style went up in smoke too quickly this would not happen with structures. The main difficulty would be to ensure that it is not too effective; perhaps left over emp could freeze it or something.

Re: R58 Stats
 

TIA - Clearly you can't read, so i guess i'll repeat myself. I NEVER said the uni was diverse RACE wise. I said that the Uni is diverse in terms of ALLY STRAT. Each ally had their own playstyle, p3ng went full cloak, ult co, faceless cr, BF fr/de....so in terms of ALLY STRAT the stats have been very successful since it seems each ally had it's own unique setup.

Re: R58 Stats
 

I think that was the sad thing with these stats. They were good in that their was lots of different viable setups. They were good because they allowed you to attack another alliance without gangbang.

They were bad because this playerbase was allowed to use them. All round we have seen 3/4 vs 1 across the board when really 1 on 1 or at a push 2 on 1 was all that was needed to roof an alliance.

Everyone in the t4 has shipped -10%+ on multiple days which has made the round swing from side to side to side and feel extremely backstabby. Tis a shame that this clever set was wasted on you.

Re: R58 Stats
 

Strat choices Willy are based on the stats and what you think other people are going to pick. If there was another counter to Xan or if Xan hadnt been such a strong pick we'd have seen more etd and terrans. However because of 3 pods and because of reaper/ghost/banshee Xan has 3 ships that are essentially 0 loss vs fi/co/Fr/De Making any of their fleets EXTREMELY strong. Had one of those ships had a counter Other than emp we'd have seen a more diverse universe. That was the problem with these stats giving a cloaked race three fire 1st ships.

But this thread is off topic this thread is meant to talk about R58 stats not this past rounds stats.

B-Butcher what are your criteria for smaller alliances because this round we had 8 alliances with 50+ and 2 alliances with 25 and 27. We can't tailor stats to serve the 52 people in heros and vikings I am sorry that's just not going to happen. I think its great having 8 full tag alliances means that there is more than 2 contenders even if 4 of them are just playing for fun. However I do agree that there needs to be more than one or two playable races because of such a spread out universe.

Re: R58 Stats
 

I volunteer for revision of sk stats.

Re: R58 Stats
 

in my pov what Santa aimed was to balance these features with the effs. Xan having three 0 loss ships was due the three different pods. As Santa is part of this group, he may explain his reasons.

Re: R58 Stats
 

R51 there was options for smaller alliances.
Though most smaller tags are very little creative and not flamboyant enough to make stats work for them.
Stats can be both offensive and defensive.

Re: R58 Stats
 

Agreed.

Re: R58 Stats
 

Encouraging alliances to do stratical choices based on their wishes.
I rember Innuendo going all FR one round cus they wanted good attacking power, ofc costing their defensive capabilities.
Total open stats are not that fun for top tier alliances, it makes it kind of meaningless investing into a round wich can be decided only on luck or not political

Re: R58 Stats
 

Using lol waves as an alliance weapon is fine. Needing to set up lol waves to stand a chance of landing is another.

I remember one recent stats-maker justifying a lack of solo attacking options by stating specifically that team-ups were needed in order to land. It is that mindset that I wish to discourage.

Re: R58 Stats
 

No.
Setting the stats up in that way that you can go an offensive race, or a defensive race mix.
Not that i generaly look to please everyone, but it IS possibole seeing we now got 5 races to choose from/play with.