Planetarion Forums

Beeblbrox · 23 Mar 2007, 16:27

Rename Value 'Power' or 'Strength' - that is after all what it is measuring, I believe this would be clearer for noobs, and I'm sure the existing PA community wouldn't bat an eyelid at the change.

Jester · 23 Mar 2007, 16:49

This sounds sensible.

The Real Arfy · 24 Mar 2007, 15:18

As you said, the existing community probably wouldn't care. However, could this be misleading? A planet with no fleet but 10000000 roids would have a high 'power or strength' which lets face it - it wouldn't.

jerome · 24 Mar 2007, 16:26

but that's not realistic either, roids give very little value.

Kal · 24 Mar 2007, 17:15

If/when we go to a new score system.

I think it would be nice to display score and power - where power is the total damage the planet's fleet can inflict. Thoughts?

Phil^ · 24 Mar 2007, 17:42

essentially, that version of score would akin to what is xp today, and power would be a factor of what value is today.
Which would the rankings be based on.

ComradeRob · 24 Mar 2007, 18:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil^

essentially, that version of score would akin to what is xp today, and power would be a factor of what value is today.
Which would the rankings be based on.

There could be two rankings of equal importance, thereby avoiding the need for another XP-vs-value argument

Phil^ · 24 Mar 2007, 19:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by ComradeRob

There could be two rankings of equal importance, thereby avoiding the need for another XP-vs-value argument

That would be the easiest way to solve a lot of problems, i agree.

Some other potential issues with it based on power though :
If it is being determined by the damage the fleet can inflict - how will it take into account the differing initiatives and combinations that a fleet can be composed of?
If its simply "sum(damage) / value(ships)" or similar then there will be problems when one fleet can inflict a higher damage before initiative is taken into account then another can.
ie, ship x has init 2 , armour 10 and damage 5 , ship y has init 4, armour 10 and damage 10
there are 100 of each ship on opposing sides, they are of equal value and they target each other
If its based on the sum of damage / value , then the second fleet comes out the winner here, however they inflict equal losses on each other after initiative is taken into account ( half of each die )
logic suggests that their fleet powers are identical in this case, no?

theres also the issue of xans if its done this way, paper armour but high damage, low costs and respectable init have been their trademarks. Such a scoring system would suit them quite nicely

Quite a fair bit of thought needs to be placed into how its going to be calculated

The Real Arfy · 25 Mar 2007, 02:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by jerome

but that's not realistic either, roids give very little value.

Right. But value is how much the planet's fleets, roids and constructions are worth. While it does indicate power, what's the point in changint to something that's essentially more wrong?

_Kila_ · 25 Mar 2007, 14:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kal

If/when we go to a new score system.

I think it would be nice to display score and power - where power is the total damage the planet's fleet can inflict. Thoughts?

I don't really like this as it'd allow people to measure your fleet without having to scan you.

Jester · 26 Mar 2007, 10:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kal

If/when we go to a new score system.

I think it would be nice to display score and power - where power is the total damage the planet's fleet can inflict. Thoughts?

Value is a very much more useful stat than how much damage a fleet can inflict.

DukePaul · 26 Mar 2007, 10:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jester

Value is a very much more useful stat than how much damage a fleet can inflict.

What he said.

Especially since some races has higher firepower/cost effectiveness than others. For example, Terran has high armour/cost effectiveness, while low firepower/cost effectiveness. Clearly, making rankings with "firepower" without taking into consideration this is ridiculous. Also, a lot of Cath ships have 0 in firepower (EMP). How does that work into the planned "power" calculations?

SpookyVince · 8 Apr 2007, 17:37

What if the roids would not count towards the value, but still towards the score.

No matter how many roids you have, you still have the value of your ships+constructions+ressources. Roids, because they're the aim of the fight anyway, are added 200 times to score (as they're now to the value).

So:
Value = (Fleet-cost / 100) + (Resources / 150) + (Constructions * 1500)
Score = (XP * 60) + (Roids * 200) + Value