r30 ship stats

[JonnyBGood]

Changed a few things, notably the harpy.

[Cochese]

These stats will, I think, definitely make people think more about PA.

Very, very interesting so far.

[Gate]

But I love the extra pods.

Current impressions:

TERRAN: I probably wouldn't play them, but if I did it would be CR attack. FR looks weak (lots of effective def vs it, particularly ingal), BS doesn't look too great either because of cloaked def. Also, I hate being so vulnerable to FI/CO. The Harpy may be worth improvement.

CATHAAR: Too EMP heavy for me (and some of their efficiencies look a lil weak IMO). I wouldn't play them.

XANDATHRII: I love them. I'd go FI/CO with bomber right now and I'd expect to do just fine. BS attack with FI def looks good, but FR looks weak (pulsars will probably ruin your round. 2 ticks to get cloaked def that RUINS you is not nice). Tbh, FI/CO/bomber looks like the best fleet comp and I think pulsar looks overpowered.

ZIKONIAN: Always do well. I don't think they stand out as strongly as they did last round and I'm not very good with stealing, so I probably wouldn't play them. If I did it would be cutlass/CR. Corsair just looks like it's eliminated too easily against non-etd frigs. Frigs look a lil too easily stopped.

EITRAIDES: I quite like them. I'd consider CO/BS. Caths are very vulnerable to defenders; they have no FI flak and the only ally anti-CO ships are FI class.

On the whole I think the FR fleets look a little weak. And the pulsar is a big contributor to that.

I'd go xand FI/CO/bomber.

If not that, then zik, then etd, then ter, then cath.

EDIT: My suggested changes would be to increase the strength of the harpy and to switch the class of the phantom and pulsar. Maybe push phant init to and interceptor to 6?

[HeimdallR]

well i always play zik, and like usuall if you can't steal yur round is ****ed.
people say its easy to steal, yeah if yur not unlucky.
if you are unlucky it may take a week or two (seen good players struggle with this for even longer periods) to get the much needed ships from other races. (this isn't different from any other round tho)

secondly with etd's allready having 4 pods, i would like to see one stealship dissappear fromt their arsenal, (pillager gone has my preference).
allowing them to steal a variaty of other ships might overpower them to much.

[Munkee]

Im going to go against you saying that zik is ****ed without steal. Last round i had 2 steals at the very start, i was de/fr only with corsair as def ships. My fleet had **** all else other than zik cutter / de in and i roided fine throughout. If you concentrate on minimal classes with zik you can go through a round fine roiding. However that was with zik having some decent kill ships as well as steal last round so its up for debate.

[Hude]

Now that you might have some variation and options, I might even consider playing again.

Etd having 4 pods and stealers looks a bit scary indeed.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Hude

Now that you might have some variation and options, I might even consider playing again.

Etd having 4 pods and stealers looks a bit scary indeed.

Hug.


I must admit gate's reservations are fairly similar to mine. There are a couple of options. Drop the chim down to fr class and leave it similar to ter de last round with reduced armour. I doubt I'd change much with ter bs, it is worth noting that it can roid 3 races. I'm not sure how you think cath's efficiencies are weak though, they're higher than most other rounds. I like your suggested changes to xan, I'll probably pop on and change some things now.


Less so when I thought about what the changes would mean for xan fi itself heh. I reduced some efficiency for now.

[MrLobster]

Originally Posted by Cochese

The fi/co targetting bs comment was a joke, but obviously nobody got it :/

Nope i knew you were joking, but I was making a serious request.

[JonnyBGood]

What I'd really like is to change the lengths of time it takes to do ship researches so let's say it wouldn't be too hard to research xan bs first and then xan fi/co would take a bit longer and fr would take ages. Obviously that's even more impractical than my proposition of new ship classes

[Gabriel]

I'd still like to see fi/co anti-bs/cr, possibly cat/etd emp to reduce its impact?

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Gabriel

I'd still like to see fi/co anti-bs/cr, possibly cat/etd emp to reduce its impact?

This would wildly imbalance the stats plus having shit fire at you while you're unable to fire back is gay. Unless you create a cr/bs which fires back at fi/co which is either going to make that race effectively immune to all fi/co incs bar that specific type unless you make all cr/bs and fi/co (whichever types you were thinking of) able to fire at each other which is going to make cr/bs very weak in general due to the abundance of (particularly ally) def versus it and is going to be much harder to balance overall due to the plethora of targetting options. In a word, no.

[MrLobster]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

...plus having shit fire at you while you're unable to fire back is gay.

Thats pretty much sums up terran with its inits.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by MrLobster

Thats pretty much sums up terran with its inits.

If terran was equipped with emp yeah. Otherwise no.

[SUFC]

4 FR pods and Pulsar owning them all by init. Who wouldn't think of Xan pwnge at this point, but i think there's some changes coming...

[Gabriel]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

*snip* In a word, no.

Fair enough.

[anthony//m]

make a carrier type ship for the terran's, i dnt know howe it wud work but it wud be fun!! but plz get rid of the anti structures they are uselles!!!

[booji]

perhaps that should be fleshed out a bit (why would you want a bigger ship to carry littler ones within the context of the planetarion use of fleets in which fighters can fly as far, and faster, than the larger ships) and put on the suggestions forum rather than in shipstats... while every ships would obviously need a set of stats I dont think its a suggestion that could be done this round.

[MrLobster]

on the manual stats screen, could you have an updated time stamp, so we all know when they were updated. Perhaps some sort of wiki would be cool to keep track of stat changes.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by MrLobster

on the manual stats screen, could you have an updated time stamp, so we all know when they were updated. Perhaps some sort of wiki would be cool to keep track of stat changes.

I basically change a couple of things every day heh. Nerfed down xan fi/co a tiny bit just now.

[Gerbie2]

Your stats have raised a question about how combat works. I want to know how efficient Scarabs are.
If I use Vipers and Scarabs against a Fr/De fleet, then I know I have a good match: the Scarabs fires at Fr and in init 2 the Vipers fire at the rest of the Fr, plus later the De.
I have no idea what happens when I put Roaches and Scarabs against a Fr/De fleet. If I look at Thrud's bcalc, then first the Scarabs fire and later the Roaches. In the LCH calc it's effectively the opposite.
Is it so that if there are 20% unused guns against Fr, that a share of those are from the Scarabs and a share of the Roaches (so these can fire again on the De) or is any of those bcalcs actually correct?

[JonnyBGood]

http://pirate.planetarion.com/showthread.php?t=197197

Newt posted a thread on this. As far as I'm aware no work was done on the combat engine so I'd imagine it's the same as it was then.

[M0RPH3US]

Phantom Fighter FI - - Cloak 4 1 4 5 19 39 39 39
Vsharrak Fighter CO FR - Cloak 5 1 5 6 24 43 43 43
Pulsar Corvette FR DE - Cloak 5 1 6 7 25 57 57 57

[JonnyBGood]

There are a number of reasons I won't be doing that. 1) Mutual annihilation battles are gay, they favour doing retarded shit like sending tiny fleets to def versus far larger ones (and if you think xan is too strong notice that I deliberately have this in place for the other 2 xan fleets!) 2) Actually it's pretty much just 1). I'm considering dropping the lancer's init down to 4 but the war frig and bolt thrower's inits relative to the pulsar will be staying the same unless someone proposes something new and funky.

[M0RPH3US]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

There are a number of reasons I won't be doing that. 1) Mutual annihilation battles are gay, they favour doing retarded shit like sending tiny fleets to def versus far larger ones (and if you think xan is too strong notice that I deliberately have this in place for the other 2 xan fleets!) 2) Actually it's pretty much just 1). I'm considering dropping the lancer's init down to 4 but the war frig and bolt thrower's inits relative to the pulsar will be staying the same unless someone proposes something new and funky.

lowering the init of the lancer wont help anything (apart from makin a xan fi/co vs etd fr battle beeing of mutual annihilation) something u just claimed to be gay
my concern is not a overpowered xan fleet in general but the lowest eta domination
xan allready has the advantage of beeing cloaked, why add the advantage of the best and fastest attack fleet ?
They got a very nice bs fleet and even with the changes i proposed a decent fi/co attack fleet + a average fr fleet
that should do it imho

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by M0RPH3US

lowering the init of the lancer wont help anything (apart from makin a xan fi/co vs etd fr battle beeing of mutual annihilation) something u just claimed to be gay

Realistically it'll mean pulsars and etd fr will avoid each other, or in other words xan fi/co won't hit etd fr planets.

my concern is not a overpowered xan fleet in general but the lowest eta domination
xan allready has the advantage of beeing cloaked, why add the advantage of the best and fastest attack fleet ?

It's not as good as it looks. Remember last round you only needed to build 2 ships for the xan fi fleet. This round you'll need to build 3 and their efficiencies are a lot lower and almost everyone else's efficiencies are higher.

They got a very nice bs fleet and even with the changes i proposed a decent fi/co attack fleet + a average fr fleet
that should do it imho

I'll probably nerf the bs fleet back some, especially considering the length of this round. The bs fleet again isn't as good as it looks, at a minimum you need to build 5 ships if you go xan bs, 6 if you want to avoid getting roided by xan fi/co yourself.

[[B5]Londo]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

I'm considering dropping the lancer's init down to 4 but the war frig and bolt thrower's inits relative to the pulsar will be staying the same.

having De class anti-fi and anti-co, both on first target the etd already seem to be well tooled up to stop a xan fi attack on them; the use of the fr as an attack fleet would seem to be far more troubled by ingal cr/bs than pulsars, against which they will fire back; even if a bit belatedly

Edit: though taking a guess there will be a few xans with shadows who primarily use a fi attack fleet who would therefore very nicely compliment the etd Fr

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by [B5]Londo

having De class anti-fi and anti-co, both on first target the etd already seem to be well tooled up to stop a xan fi attack on them; the use of the fr as an attack fleet would seem to be far more troubled by ingal cr/bs than pulsars, against which they will fire back; even if a bit belatedly

If you build the de fleet yes. I'd imagine to some extent people will try and pick their fleets instead of building a little of this and a little of that, which is rarely, if ever, a decent strategy.

[[B5]Londo]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

If you build the de fleet yes. I'd imagine to some extent people will try and pick their fleets instead of building a little of this and a little of that, which is rarely, if ever, a decent strategy.

The etd fr obviously needs to combine the fr with the bs or the fr with the de I dont see a problem with the idea that if you chose the De route you are weaker against Bs/Cr, which almost all shoot the gryph b4 it fires, than if U had the Scorpion/Broadsword; but on the other hand can have a few centaurs to stop the xan fi while if U have the Bs you have a bit of a problem with fi.

Seems fair atm is all im saying.

[Onim]

hmm its giving me headaches ...i'd say CO (and to a little bit lesser extend FI) is the best attackclass, only 6 ships usuable for allydef firing at you, out of which 5 have CO as t2, making them damn hard to stop (even without mentioning the the great advantage of only 1 hour to get def)

and this applies to Cath CO + Xan FI/CO the most, seeing as Etd CO will have to rely on teamups whereas cath and xan could go soloing as well.

But this is my first thought and only considered attacking so far

i'd actually try cath again, though i really disliked em last round and i have my doubts on its effective anti DE, with only 2 races (etd, cath) having DE ships (not counting the ter struct killer) and knowing those 2 both have better attackfleet options (Cath co or cr, etd co or bs) i'd say thats only a minor weakness.

Xan is very strong too, but they have a major weakness vs cr, which will most certainly be the most favoured attackfleet of ters and ziks (and for caths 2nd best)

Looking at other races, i see more small or big weaknesses overall, so i'd be picking either cath or xan, and if i were to make the rules in an ally id even force members to go those 2 , maybe backed by some expert ziks.

[JonnyBGood]

I made a few tweaks there. Downgraded the phant/shad/spec, upgraded the harpy and the smuggler. I think appoco wanted the stats for around about now so this is what I'll be passing on for "testing" so we can all make hilariously retarded comments based on the beta.

Lirled at the idea of a cath dominated alliance though

[Thatcher]

change spider t1 co t2 fi

reduces xan fi/co def
reduces etd co def/attacks slightly
boosts zik corsair def

[Onim]

Originally Posted by Thatcher

change spider t1 co t2 fi

reduces xan fi/co def
reduces etd co def/attacks slightly
boosts zik corsair def

and it makes xan fi unnecessarily stronger, while drastically decreasing the smuggler's power to steal some highly needed cath DE..

something i do feel is a bit odd, both etd stealships have t1 CO. Perhaps the pillager could have its t1 and t2 swapped?

and is there a reason why no Ter ship has t1 BS? I think it would be good to change targetting of either the chimaera, titan or dreadnaught to BS-CR instead of all 3 CR-BS.

[SUFC]

Pillager is ETD's next best ship against Pulsar after Defender and mainly only usefull ship against Cath COs.

[Thatcher]

Originally Posted by Onim

and it makes xan fi unnecessarily stronger, while drastically decreasing the smuggler's power to steal some highly needed cath DE..

how so, atm cath de has to freeze ALL xan fi before it gets to emp pulsars

xan fi isnt made stronger, not like cath de can defend outside galaxy, and xan fi doesnt targ de.

basicly doing this makes cath de like etd fr last rd, ie in theory very strong against xan

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Thatcher

change spider t1 co t2 fi

reduces xan fi/co def
reduces etd co def/attacks slightly
boosts zik corsair def

Uh, have you actually looked at efficiencies for emp? Trust me, t1 and t2 have almost nothing to do with it. This is the reason I'm using gate's method for emp.

something i do feel is a bit odd, both etd stealships have t1 CO. Perhaps the pillager could have its t1 and t2 swapped?

No they don't?

and is there a reason why no Ter ship has t1 BS? I think it would be good to change targetting of either the chimaera, titan or dreadnaught to BS-CR instead of all 3 CR-BS.

Yes, there is. I wanted to decrease the relative power of ter cr versus bs and avoid the dreadnaught being its own worst enemy for def. For the chim it was a question of what can hit you, of which I think only xan bs can do so really effectively. However I would consider changing that one back.

[quote[how so, atm cath de has to freeze ALL xan fi before it gets to emp pulsars[/quote] You'll be doing both anyways so I really have zero idea what you're talking about here.

[Thatcher]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

Uh, have you actually looked at efficiencies for emp? Trust me, t1 and t2 have almost nothing to do with it. This is the reason I'm using gate's method for emp.

acutally t1 and t2 has everything to do with it, as is, xan fi/co whores can send awesome def, as cath de has to freeze all the xan fi before it can start freezing the xan co (which is the only xan ships that targs de which can be used in uni def)

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Thatcher

acutally t1 and t2 has everything to do with it, as is, xan fi/co whores can send awesome def, as cath de has to freeze all the xan fi before it can start freezing the xan co (which is the only xan ships that targs de which can be used in uni def)

Ah, you're talking about defence okay. To be honest I imagine it'll be rare you'll find many xans attacking without their whole fi/co and whether they do or not is part of the fun of xan and I'd rather leave it in than get rid of it. Personally I feel ~164% efficiency for cath de on both xan fi and co is good enough, I might tweak it up a tiny bit more, I'll wait and see. Also switching just one emp ship to t1 co would mean both the others would need to be switched as well for it to remain viable within the current paradigm. You'd then have similar issues with the beet/defender having to freeze all the co before freezing the fi.

[Thatcher]

not changing something because it wld go against gate's cath targing dogma is a poor excuse, increasing effciency of cath de wont change things.

[JonnyBGood]

Do you know what you're talking about? I'm saying switching one emp ship's t1 and t2 without switching the others will result in issues where one cath ship is either absurdly superb against one class or shitty versus another. This isn't a dogmatic point, this is objectively true within the framework of emp efficiency. The fact you think changing the efficiency of cath de won't change how good they are gives me doubts about how serious you are though heh.

[Thatcher]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

Do you know what you're talking about? I'm saying switching one emp ship's t1 and t2 without switching the others will result in issues where one cath ship is either absurdly superb against one class or shitty versus another. This isn't a dogmatic point, this is objectively true within the framework of emp efficiency. The fact you think changing the efficiency of cath de won't change how good they are gives me doubts about how serious you are though heh.

ty for the insult, in return, may i raise my doubts about if you have EVER organised defence against cath emp?
frankly its about making cath de a viable attacking force, xan fake fi/co def is going to be unfairly effective, both threatening to soak emp with fi and then kill with unaffected co.
the only way your going to change that in current stats will be changing spider t1 co t2 fi

with 2 ticks to get fake xan def in a uni with loads of xan fi whores i dont see any cath de fleets landing with these stats.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Thatcher

ty for the insult, in return, may i raise my doubts about if you have EVER organised defence against cath emp?
frankly its about making cath de a viable attacking force, xan fake fi/co def is going to be unfairly effective, both threatening to soak emp with fi and then kill with unaffected co.
the only way your going to change that in current stats will be changing spider t1 co t2 fi

with 2 ticks to get fake xan def in a uni with loads of xan fi whores i dont see any cath de fleets landing with these stats.

Fake xan def is hardly a round ender or "unfairly effective". Let's face it after tick 300 odd every emp planet, and pretty much every planet for that matter, in the universe will be teaming up. At that point it becomes massively about efficiency in defence for your growth. And fake xan def is viable versus loads of things. The idea is you work out if it's fake or not, this isn't that hardest thing on the planet to do.

Not to mention the fact that you are still just ignoring (hence my question about whether you know what you're talking about) what I'm saying about this creating a bunch of other problems with emp efficiencies versus fi and co.

[SUFC]

Thacher, so you want to freeze Xan CO while the FI roiders can roid you freely instead of freezing the FI roiders so the Xan thinks it's waste of time to land on you and recalls?

[Thatcher]

if you cant see the problem iam pointing out i have to assume you dont want too

yes i understand that cath targetting can result in problems, but to take advantage of them you have to dilute ur fleet (which is a greater disadvantage).
changing spider t1 to co and t2 to fi gives you a great chance to really reduce xan fi/co attackers effectivness (spider/warfrig ingal def) AND to make xans nice targs for cath de attackers.

personally if this overpowers caths, i admit i far prefer it to overpowered xan.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by SUFC

Thacher, so you want to freeze Xan CO while the FI roiders can roid you freely instead of freezing the FI roiders so the Xan thinks it's waste of time to land on you and recalls?

I doubt that happens too often. There is a point to bear in mind as well as this though, concerns such as this, over the viability of an emp only roiding fleet with 2 ticks to gather def, are part of the reason cath have a stealship which targets fr/de this round, enabling you to steal ships and fill in holes in your fleet.

[Thatcher]

Originally Posted by SUFC

Thacher, so you want to freeze Xan CO while the FI roiders can roid you freely instead of freezing the FI roiders so the Xan thinks it's waste of time to land on you and recalls?

oki now think of spiders/centaur/pillager teaming ingal to stop xan fi/co incs

spiders wont be used in uni to def anyway

changing targs means caths less open to xan fi/co incs as once pulsars frozen, their de cant be hurt, making def easier

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Thatcher

if you cant see the problem iam pointing out i have to assume you dont want too

I can see the problem. We're actually talking about. I a) don't think it's that relevant and b) think the problems it would cause by following your proposed solution actually weaken the other emp roiding fleets a lot more.

yes i understand that cath targetting can result in problems, but to take advantage of them you have to dilute ur fleet (which is a greater disadvantage).

Er, this isn't what I'm talking about at all. I'm talking about cath having to build 1 t1 fr t2 de and 1 t1 de t2 fr ship depending on the circumstances of their incoming instead of just being able to plug your res into one ship as the efficiencies aren't massively different. You really actually appear to not get this. I've done what you proposed and the results can be seen here http://beta.planetarion.com/statsanalysis.pl?race=2 How do you propose we address the rather obvious problem that while the spider is now insanely good at freezing co, it's sub 100% for fi? You are always going to run into similar problems to what we saw last round where it becomes excessively difficult for cath to freeze a particular class of incoming or poor at freezing one mega-class.

changing spider t1 to co and t2 to fi gives you a great chance to really reduce xan fi/co attackers effectivness (spider/warfrig ingal def) AND to make xans nice targs for cath de attackers.

Yeah because god knows no cath de will be able to roid xan at all.

http://beta.thrud.co.uk/index.php?loadfile=beta46971a0

personally if this overpowers caths, i admit i far prefer it to overpowered xan.

I'd prefer nothing to be overpowered.

[Thatcher]

i do see where ur coming from, but unless something is changed xan fi/co will pawn cath de

ofc u cld just remove xan fi pod, problem (largly) solved

[Munkee]

christ, spider looks scarey powerful now vs xan fi/co

http://beta.thrud.co.uk/index.php?loadfile=beta78856a0 thats a shit load of value to sink in to anti de as well as then having to get the other classes covered

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Munkee

christ, spider looks scarey powerful now vs xan fi/co

http://beta.thrud.co.uk/index.php?loadfile=beta78856a0 thats a shit load of value to sink in to anti de as well as then having to get the other classes covered

As killerbee pointed out it's not that bad if you go fi/co. That does of course leave you weak in other areas. Which is what I've tried to do!

[booji]

Originally Posted by Thatcher

how so, atm cath de has to freeze ALL xan fi before it gets to emp pulsars

would it not be more sensible to solve this by making the pulsar fi and the Vsharrak a co? though that would then cause the same problem for cat/etd co. or else simply make all 3 xan ships as fi which ofc increases the power of the xan fi fleet as a whole, tho presumably makes it less effective against cat de which seems to be the race/ship in question.

edit: perhaps it would be better to make it the phantom rather than the vsharrak that becomes a co as the only race it affects will be other xan (or later zik) and they will still fire on each efficiancy (tho on the vsharrak and pulsar, not the phantom) with the same force as before the class change.
(this does make phantom def against xan fi more effective, dunno if that is good or bad)