|
|
22 Dec 2009, 15:58
|
#201
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 16
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
It is relatively easy to see what to attack with single-targeting and it's a bit more intuitive.
|
You said it yourself m8. The key word here JBG is 'limiting', not impossible just less challenging. I am sure you were pretty good at it too m8. I do believe there are better ways to spice things up a bit without making it too boring. The reason why I like DragonKing's stats so far!
__________________
xVx - eXilition DC - Destiny - Denial - CT - Ascendancy - Apprime - NewDawn
Last edited by vex`; 22 Dec 2009 at 16:10.
|
|
|
22 Dec 2009, 16:08
|
#202
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
I don't think single-targeting rounds were more boring than multi-targeting ones. If anything I would have said the opposite as recent rounds just became a case of get as much brute force together as you can and overwhelm the opposition with fi/co or cr/bs teamups where you pretty much have every ship that is available involved. I certainly don't think one round of it would be less challenging as everyone would have to adjust their strategy etc. I mean one round dude, we've played 11 rounds this way, if it was that boring from r11-23 I'm pretty sure we'd remember it for being appallingly shit.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
22 Dec 2009, 16:41
|
#203
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 16
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
If anything I would have said the opposite as recent rounds just became a case of get as much brute force ...
|
The brute force was the alliance's choice or looking for strengths and weakness for the opponents. BS guys did land several awesome fakes because of the diversity of targeting. In the beginning it was a war of BS and ended up diversifying due to awesome possibilities which provided more lands. I do believe that we can improve the stats we had this round in a way that we don't need too many fleets on the same target.
Obviously, it came down to who has the more active members and politics at the end but... I didn't think this round was boring. I like to see the underdog have a chance, have many possibilities, not being limited being able to fight against the very active alliances. (I still don't understand why Asc gave Appr the win but that is besides the point)
I am of the idea of keeping it familiar. I am putting myself in the shoes of the new players, it will help to keep them returning and enjoying a game that is not restricted to massive value in order to have a chance to landing a target. Bringing single-targeting back will favor, I believe, the elite players as always.
__________________
xVx - eXilition DC - Destiny - Denial - CT - Ascendancy - Apprime - NewDawn
|
|
|
22 Dec 2009, 16:47
|
#204
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by vex`
The brute force was the alliance's choice or looking for strengths and weakness for the opponents. BS guys did land several awesome fakes because of the diversity of targeting. In the beginning it was a war of BS and ended up diversifying due to awesome possibilities which provided more lands. I do believe that we can improve the stats we had this round in a way that we don't need too many fleets on the same target.
|
You can, to some extent, but multi-targeting will always, always, always require more fleets than single-targeting to land. That's just the nature of targeting distribution.
Quote:
I am of the idea of keeping it familiar. I am putting myself in the shoes of the new players, it will help to keep them returning and enjoying a game that is not restricted to massive value in order to have a chance to landing a target. Bringing single-targeting back will favor, I believe, the elite players as always.
|
What? Are you actually playing the same game as the rest of us heh? Listen to wishmaster, single-targeting favours the "nubs". Multi-targeting demands massive value in order to land on people. You've got it way the hell backwards here.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
22 Dec 2009, 17:29
|
#205
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 16
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
single-targeting favours the "nubs". Multi-targeting demands massive value in order to land on people.
|
I saw the underdog being able to put up a good fight even if they were lots smaller in value. Perhaps, the single or multiple targeting does not make much difference in strategy, as players will team up to be able to get through anyways,...
as you said earlier, that it was easier to defend...
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
Multi-targeting leads to defence dominated, roid holding type of rounds where it's extremely difficult to win a round on the offensive.
|
This is what nubs need, holding their roids, being able to defend themselves with several different options against the elite, the alliances that have mastered the attacking tactics of PA. In the other side, being able to fake attack with more possibilities than a single-targeting could offer. I do believe that the stats this last round needed some adjusting so I am not going to use it as an example as you can read those suggestions mentioned above.
And JBG, just because you made stats before doesn't mean that you are the only one that can give another angle and valid point or idea... trying to bully me doesn't work .... Appoco will decide anyways on what he wants to do. Lets stick to the reasoning and the insides, we will probably have a calc to test them anyways
In any event, your single-targeting stats will not compare to previous single-targeting stats we had which makes yours still very questionable if Appoco decides to do it.
__________________
xVx - eXilition DC - Destiny - Denial - CT - Ascendancy - Apprime - NewDawn
Last edited by vex`; 22 Dec 2009 at 17:35.
|
|
|
22 Dec 2009, 17:38
|
#206
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
I think that answers your question, JBG.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
22 Dec 2009, 17:44
|
#207
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by vex`
I saw the underdog being able to put up a good fight even if they were lots smaller in value. Perhaps, the single or multiple targeting does not make much difference in strategy, as players will team up to be able to get through anyways,...
as you said earlier, that it was easier to defend...
|
Right, and it being easier to defend makes it easier for those more likely to get defence. Which, er, aren't the new players. What you saw, conversely, was a smaller planet being completely unable to even dent a bigger planet, which is what in turn leads to the giant teamups. Trying to paint this as a picture where 'the underdog can put up a good fight' is just horrifying.
Quote:
This is what nubs need, holding their roids, being able to defend themselves with several different options against the elite, the alliances that have mastered the attacking tactics of PA. In the other side, being able to fake attack with more possibilities than a single-targeting could offer. I do believe that the stats this last round needed some adjusting so I am not going to use it as an example as you can read those suggestions mentioned above.
|
Holy **** you really aren't playing the same game as the rest of us. New players get bashed into the ****ing ground at the minute. Hell they'll still get bashed into the ground with single-targeting but what probably will happen is that everyone's target selection drifts up a bit due to the relative ease of attacking. This is just how the game works. I mean, this was a fairly competitive round right? And we still saw a bunch of planets which never got roided. Back under single-targeting this would have been unheard of.
Primarily though they'll just be able to attack people on their own. Either way talking about totally new players is missing the point. New players don't give a shit about stats and by the time they do it's only because they've already decided they want to play the game, not that there are more than 10 of them anyways. And faking has almost nothing to do with totally new players (not that you seem to be able to understand that it faking did happen more often from r11-23).
I'm not trying to bully you. You're just claiming things which are so retarded it's laughable. If anyone, and I mean anyone, would like to claim any of the following please speak up:
1) faking happens more often now than it did under single-targeting
2) the current multi-targeting system somehow favours nubs holding their roids
3) bringing back single-targeting will favour the elite players
Quote:
In any event, your single-targeting stats will not compare to previous single-targeting stats we had which makes yours still questionable if Appoco decides to do it.
|
I know your english isn't that awesome dude but this doesn't even make sense!
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
22 Dec 2009, 17:45
|
#208
|
self-entitledly superior
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 341
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by vex`
In the other side, being able to fake attack with more possibilities than a single-targeting could offer.
|
That's so wrong. It was a lot easier to fake when we had single targetting.
edit: heh, what JBG said!
|
|
|
22 Dec 2009, 17:53
|
#209
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 16
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
ya Ok funny how asc pms come about and asc repplies jump in at same time LOL
It is impressive the arrogance
__________________
xVx - eXilition DC - Destiny - Denial - CT - Ascendancy - Apprime - NewDawn
|
|
|
22 Dec 2009, 17:58
|
#210
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 16
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
no matter what i say m8 or anyone, as long it is not your way... it is not right! so i'll leave this as it is... pointless wasting time on this forums cause its got you either way no N00bs read this forums as it is which i don't blame them
__________________
xVx - eXilition DC - Destiny - Denial - CT - Ascendancy - Apprime - NewDawn
|
|
|
22 Dec 2009, 18:01
|
#211
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Look, I'm not objecting to people who want multi-targeting stats sets. I've done loads of them and there are a few in this thread. I'm not saying single-targeting would be objectively better, I'm just saying it'd be different and after 11 rounds of multi-targeting that sort of change would help make pa more interesting in the short-term. What I would say is that the arguments that you've presented have been so blatantly wrong that I'm asking for one single person to come on here who agrees with you on any of those 3 points. I'm not going to ignore you as "being entitled to your opinion" if you come on here and say that multi-targeting stats sets are way better because single-targeting promotes fascism either.
Not to mention the fact neither Hude nor I are actually in Ascendancy.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
22 Dec 2009, 18:10
|
#212
|
self-entitledly superior
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 341
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by vex`
ya Ok funny how asc pms come about and asc repplies jump in at same time LOL
It is impressive the arrogance
|
What the hell does this have to do with arrogance? And besides, I'm not even Asc anymore. I honestly and genuinely think that it was a lot easier to fake before multi targetting was introduced and I've said it before.
|
|
|
22 Dec 2009, 18:33
|
#213
|
zawze^asc
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Norway.
Posts: 87
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Please share the PM from the Asc guy so I can have a laugh!
TYVM.
On another note, I wouldn't mind single-targetting as it'd atleast be some change. I'd wish for larger changes, as indicated in that other thread, but it's not like it's christmas.
__________________
"Facts are just opinions, and opinons can be wrong, the only thing that's never wrong is confidence."
- Veronica Palmer, Better Off Ted
|
|
|
23 Dec 2009, 00:24
|
#214
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: blackpool england
Posts: 76
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
i agree with vex and i am sure other people do as well but no i am not going to bother arguing on the forums with you JBG because i have better things to waste my time on, blowing my nose comes to mind, appoc and the support team will decide the stats and make the choice they think is best for PA, and dont get me wrong i like the stats you have done in the past but just because you want to go back to single targeting doesnt mean it is what is best for the game ask appoc to run a single targeting speed game and get your fun out of that
__________________
Veni Vedi Vici
We came We saw We conquered
(then we got laided )
Round 27 28 HA DC BC, 29 VGN DC, 30 ND DC, 31 32 HA head DC,
Round 33 34 35 ND DC
Round 36 37 38 ND HC DC
Round 39 to Forever ND DC
|
|
|
23 Dec 2009, 01:09
|
#215
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
The support team actually have zero impact on the stats. And fair enough you agree with vex. I guess a few people believe the moon is made out of cheese and refuse to acknowledge anyone who sayys differently as well, I can't imagine I'll lose much sleep over that either. On the evidence in this thread it certainly seems like more people would prefer to go back to single-targeting for a round than stick with multi-targeting though. I mean if you want to just sit there and wait for pateam to make a decision and avoid discussing stats fair enough. This does appear to be a strategy discussions forum and a stats thread though...
Edit: For the record which of the 3 points of vex's I mentioned did you agree with?
1) faking happens more often now than it did under single-targeting
2) the current multi-targeting system somehow favours nubs holding their roids
3) bringing back single-targeting will favour the elite players
That's them again in case you're too busy blowing your nose to scroll back up!
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
23 Dec 2009, 01:21
|
#216
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,663
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonKing
appoc and the support team will decide the stats and make the choice they think is best for PA
|
I hope with a better result than the last 2 rounds.
I agree that single targetting is more nub friendly. They get bashed all the same but at least they got a chance to land attacks on their own.
Having to build more than 3 ships and having to balance (or deliberately unbalance) your fleet is certainly less boring than pilling up banshee+phantom all round long.
__________________
<smith> You're 15 and full of shit.
<Furious_George> no, im 22
|
|
|
23 Dec 2009, 01:25
|
#217
|
LDK
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Norway
Posts: 2,220
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Right.
As all know ( some does atleast! ), I m a fan of multitargetting. I dont like being roided, I dont like xp and I dont like to build 8 ships
I do see the points for a change every now and then though. But I just fear that changing back for 1-2 rounds, and we would wait another 3-4 years before someone bothered to set a new multitargetting statset.
I remember that round where all races had a stealship to be a fun singletargetting round, I spose there has been others also...
I also think that if pa are ever gonna get more casual players, people HAVE to be able to roid something solo...... Maybe singletargetting stats is what we should look at for a FB version of the game?
__________________
[Omen]
Quote:
Originally posted by Newt
I would give me right testicle to be in a gal with you wishmaster!!! wonder if thatd be enough to bribe spinner with hmmmm
|
<JC`> i sent him a msg saying Wishmaster 0wns, so he recalled
|
|
|
23 Dec 2009, 08:50
|
#218
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Tallinn
Posts: 734
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
every time theres a thread about multi/single targeting ive been said yes to singletargeting..
same this time - bring back single targeting
__________________
VISION FTW
THIS IS ULTORES
|
|
|
23 Dec 2009, 15:56
|
#219
|
Apprime Troll HC
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 857
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
im pro single targeting
|
|
|
23 Dec 2009, 17:57
|
#220
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Ultimately it comes down to a design choice. I won't repeat everything JBG has said in this thread, but single targeting favours an offense oriented playing style, while multi targetting favours a defence oriented playing style. There is no "better" or "worse" choice to be made here, just different ones. This has in fact been shown countless times in the past, so there is little point in arguing about it.
Your votes don't mean anything, nobody should care about them. As I am so fond of saying: game design is not a democracy. Someone (Appoco) needs to come forward and tell us what kind of game he wants to have here, because until that happens, this is all just pointless debate.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
23 Dec 2009, 18:14
|
#221
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
There's so little actual game design going on that at this point I don't really see the harm in pandering to the community and changing a few things each round to at least keep the 1k or so planets, who sign up almost every round and keep the game alive, still interested. I mean I really don't think any actual game design has happened since, what, pax?
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
23 Dec 2009, 18:19
|
#222
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Yeah, that sounds about right.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
23 Dec 2009, 20:48
|
#223
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Noruega
Posts: 2,999
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Anyone heard anything from pa crew about what direction they're going?
__________________
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of War"
|
|
|
23 Dec 2009, 21:09
|
#224
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Christ alone only knows. I'd offered to do all the nitty gritty changes to appoco ages ago but as I'm going away now for a bit and still no announcement here they are: stats and races/governments.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
24 Dec 2009, 09:38
|
#225
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 60
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
I like it JBG!
single targeting will make fleetcompositions more interesting.
Furthermore, I very much like the changes in governments, which will also make the game more interesting. People can really match the government to their own playing style then and there will be more diversity.
Go JBG go!
(Appoco, i hope you agree)
|
|
|
24 Dec 2009, 10:08
|
#226
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,663
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Democracy
Socialism
Totalitarianism
Corporatism
Nationalism
maybe it's my limited english but i dont get all of that... i couldn't name a "corporatist" country, I don't see what Nationalism is.
Wouldn't it be better to base the terms on something we know from real countries:
-Democracy
-Monarchy
-Military Dictatorship
-Religious Government
-Socialism
__________________
<smith> You're 15 and full of shit.
<Furious_George> no, im 22
|
|
|
24 Dec 2009, 10:45
|
#227
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Noruega
Posts: 2,999
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
So what if there isn't a "corporatist" country, we are playing a SPACE GAME man, who knows what kind of governments might appear in the future.
__________________
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of War"
|
|
|
24 Dec 2009, 11:31
|
#228
|
fanboy
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 492
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Nationalism should obviously be planetarism.
__________________
Ascendancy, former [ 1UP] & Ministry.
FOUNDER OF THE OFFICIAL ASCENDANCY LADY GAGA FAN CLUB
ASCENDANCY DEMOLITION MAN
|
|
|
24 Dec 2009, 11:33
|
#229
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,663
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
ofc, i was just making a suggestion, it won't change the game anyway.
__________________
<smith> You're 15 and full of shit.
<Furious_George> no, im 22
|
|
|
24 Dec 2009, 14:21
|
#230
|
idle
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 968
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
i am pro jbg´s suggestion
looks good to me, lets have it for ONE round
__________________
m0rph3us formerly known as Bugz
"It´s not about how hard u hit, its about how hard u can get hit and still keep moving forward! How much u can take and still move forward!"
|
|
|
28 Dec 2009, 12:11
|
#231
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Noruega
Posts: 2,999
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Heard something about JBG's single-targeting set of stats is being used in some form, anyone know more?
__________________
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of War"
|
|
|
28 Dec 2009, 13:47
|
#232
|
idle
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 968
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by isildurx
Heard something about JBG's single-targeting set of stats is being used in some form, anyone know more?
|
that would be damn good news
my last info is, that it wasn´t decided if single or multi targeting
but this means they at least consider(ed) it
__________________
m0rph3us formerly known as Bugz
"It´s not about how hard u hit, its about how hard u can get hit and still keep moving forward! How much u can take and still move forward!"
|
|
|
28 Dec 2009, 16:20
|
#233
|
Apprime Troll HC
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 857
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
I dont know about you all but i will be single-targetting no matter what the stats are. no more mums
|
|
|
28 Dec 2009, 16:40
|
#234
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: In bed with your mum.
Posts: 664
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Did someone say single targetting?
YES PLEASE.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
Can people please stop pretending they have no chance of winning at tick 300, you just end up looking retarded later.
|
^^^^ Can you blv that sh*t?
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 01:46
|
#235
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
A lot of people seem to just want some variety. With most other changes requiring a fair bit of coding this is a fairly easy way to change the game quite a bit for one round. That's my opinion anyways. A certain amount of others seem to prefer the more attacking game single-targeting leads towards.
Edit: Considering reese deleted her post I'll just say that the above was my view on why people want single-targeting!
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 02:24
|
#236
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,663
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Apparently PA Team will not implement any significant change for the next round (though i guess we will have a list with stuff like: added an 's' to the word planet on the manual page 3...), so yes single targeting is the easiest way to get people bored by 2 awful rounds to sign up for free.
__________________
<smith> You're 15 and full of shit.
<Furious_George> no, im 22
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 04:57
|
#237
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
I've uploaded the first iteration here if people care to comment. I'll try to have them finalised fairly quickly so they're in place once signups open.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 14:22
|
#238
|
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Lithuania, Vilnius
Posts: 106
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
mhm
Last edited by izverg; 29 Dec 2009 at 14:27.
Reason: it was a joke
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 14:40
|
#239
|
idle
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 968
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
someone share his thoughts pls
__________________
m0rph3us formerly known as Bugz
"It´s not about how hard u hit, its about how hard u can get hit and still keep moving forward! How much u can take and still move forward!"
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 15:07
|
#240
|
The Holy Goose
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Eindhoven
Posts: 46
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Well, first of all I want to say well done for changing the stats and putting effort in it. Not everyone might support this (single targetting) choice, but that will always be the case. I like it though.
My view on the stats:
Ter, Xan, Zik and Etd all have a good Fr or DE fleet. There are only 2 FI or CO fleets and 4 CR or Bs fleets. So there will most likely be a lot of FR/DE Fleets as they seem best at the moment.
Terran and Cathaar do not have an anti-DE ship that can make the eta for alliance defence. There will be lots of smugglers though on the other hand.
Also Apparations are way too good. Xans have 2 flak DE ships themselves, while others don't even have 1.
Possibility: Make Phoenix hit DE instead of CO. Keep init the same.
Possibility: Make Cutlass steal CO init 20, Thief a CO ship stealing FI init 21, Clipper stealing FR init 19.
Possibility: Changing Titan's target to CR and Scorpion to a DE ship hitting BS at init 7 and Chimaera's target to BS.
Hopefully you can use this feedback. Incase you want more information about the changes you can always pm me on irc.
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 16:04
|
#241
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Noruega
Posts: 2,999
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supergans
So there will most likely be a lot of FR/DE Fleets as they seem best at the moment.
|
I agree that FR\DE looks good at the moment for some races, however, atleast in my opinion, some of the races have a better roiding fleet than their fr\de fleet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supergans
Terran and Cathaar do not have an anti-DE ship that can make the eta for alliance defence.
|
I dont view this as a problem, it's not like alliances will only need def vs fr\de.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supergans
Also Apparations are way too good. Xans have 2 flak DE ships themselves, while others don't even have 1.
|
The problem is that races need to have their SK in a fleet where it can be sent on attack, and somehow I doubt people are willing to have the Xan SK be a FI...
The possibility of Xan having a CR\BS SK isn't really viable imo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supergans
Possibility: Make Cutlass steal CO init 20, Thief a CO ship stealing FI init 21, Clipper stealing FR init 19.
|
Disagree here as this would make Xan CO, which is already weak, even weaker.
__________________
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of War"
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 16:17
|
#242
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
As regards the apparition i'd be perfectly willing to drop it down to an fi class ship either, I don't really mind.
I'm not sure why you think the fr/de fleets are so superior though supergans? Personally I think the zik cr fleet and the terran bs fleets are superior to their fr/de counterparts.
I disagree on the cutlass for the reason isil stated. The phoenix change I would consider (for pretty much the same reasons as I'm against the cutlass change). Dropping down the scorpion an eta bracket would hurt bs too much in my opinion. Every single race (bar zik who, for obvious reasons, might not be excluded for long) then has a de class anti-bs ship. It would also mean etd bs and zik cr (and it would improve the ability of cath cr) could roid terran and terran are very easy to underpower.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 16:54
|
#243
|
The Holy Goose
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Eindhoven
Posts: 46
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Well with Shadows and Pirates I don't count Terran BS above DE. Teaming up won't solve this problem.
With Terran DE the defence possibilities are not so ace and with a teamup with an Etd or Xan it will be even harder.
I do ofcourse count Zik Cr above Zik FR.
Right, the cutlass changes was stupid, my mistake.
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 16:59
|
#244
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Pirates will obviously be a problem but so are pulsars and fireblades for de and one of those has 2 ticks to be sent. There are also syrens and dreadnaughts (although obviously only ingal/prelaunched). Not really sure why you think terran de is that much better. It's questionable to what extent shadows would emerge in the game as well. You have to have ghosts if you want anti-fr and if you have ghosts spectres are good flak for them and vice versa and you won't have to research cr/bs hulls.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 17:06
|
#245
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Noruega
Posts: 2,999
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Pirates are an attack ship as well after all.
__________________
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of War"
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 17:12
|
#246
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Yeah but so are all the anti-de ships I mentioned so I didn't bother bringing that up.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 17:21
|
#247
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Noruega
Posts: 2,999
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
Yeah, of course.
Overall, depending on efficiencies, I'd say the stats look pretty balanced. People just have to choose which sacrifices they are willing to make(some fleet-compos are better defensively and some better offensively).
Sure hope emp efficiencies aren't going to be to high.
__________________
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of War"
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 17:26
|
#248
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
EMP efficiencies.
I usually start off high and get argued down on cath efficiencies.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 17:30
|
#249
|
self-entitledly superior
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 341
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
I'm slightly disappointed with zik not having any fr or bs stealers.
|
|
|
29 Dec 2009, 17:36
|
#250
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: Round 34 Stats
I'd consider changing the clipper to de->fr. The no bs stealer is deliberate and I want to keep it for a few reasons (no need for a zik bs class ship, no need to either jam in another de class anti-bs ship).
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:03.
| |