Stats maker
Would it be possible for PA Team to make a program or seperate site for all budding stat makers. Somewhere you can input your stats and then test them in a bcalc. It's so hard to balance a set just on a spreadsheet unless you 110% know what you are doing. Might get more people trying to make stats and some good sets could emerge from an unlikely source.
|
Re: Stats maker
Seconded.
|
Re: Stats maker
Just to add to this from the initial idea last night, from personal experience trying to balance emp effs and so on and see how ships operate in combat without access to the beta server is quite hard. We get a few sets turn up every round which are commented on as 'the start of a good set' or 'utter garbage' then they get like a million tweaks and changes before round start. With this idea we could actually have finished sets presented to the playerbase which could then be chosen or voted on by a stats commitee maybe?
|
Re: Stats maker
maybe a credit for the winner
|
Re: Stats maker
Quote:
What is the allocation of prizes nowadays anyways? Top 3 Planets = 1 credit (Plus a mug to the winner) Top Galaxy = 3 credits Top Alliance = 5 credits Tag Comp = 5 credits (is this right?) Round name winner = 1 credit Guy who worked for 30+ hrs on stats = nothing |
Re: Stats maker
it's a little unbalanced
|
Re: Stats maker
No. Keep as many people away from the (horrific) stats interface as possible. You don't need (or even want) a bcalc for most of the stats making process, anyway. Once you're in the (soul crushingly boring) last phase of stats making you should be the only "contender" left.
Quote:
|
Re: Stats maker
You're just a miserable ****, MZ.
|
Re: Stats maker
And I want you all to be as miserable as I am.
|
Re: Stats maker
someone needs to make stats for next round
|
Re: Stats maker
I don't want to see Tiamats to touch the stats for another 4 rounds minium and would welcome another experienced player to have a go.
|
Re: Stats maker
Haven't heard very many complaints re: my stats this round, but there's always some people who are unhappy.
If I was to do another set of stats at some point I'd go for three podclasses each probably. |
Re: Stats maker
CAT CO ARE TOO HUGGIE
or something about Beetles |
Re: Stats maker
Quote:
threepod classes sounds great! |
Re: Stats maker
Quote:
and iŽd enjoy it myself very much aswell cause even though the only response to my last stats attempt was a "lol", i always will and would give it another shot |
Re: Stats maker
I dunno, 29% caths in uni and 35 caths in the t100. I suspect this number will drop as the round goes on. Doesn't seem awfully overpowered to me.
|
Re: Stats maker
25 cath in the top50
statistics dont tell about combat gameplay |
Re: Stats maker
And the round isn't even halfway, caths ALWAYS do great first half of the round.
|
Re: Stats maker
8 in top 10...
|
Re: Stats maker
That's because they're all spore or napped to spore and have inited like crazy. The stats have little to do with it. When a planet in the top 10 can invest 70% of their resources in one ship and still aren't getting roided, it's down to politics, not the stats. Please get a clue before posting idiotic comments.
|
Re: Stats maker
stats allowed the 1 ship build to be effective no?
|
Re: Stats maker
No, politics did.
|
Re: Stats maker
it was pointed out that EMP was OP before round start.
|
Re: Stats maker
So because the beetle is good EMP is OP? What about how easily cath are roided by other classes than fi and co?
The fact of the matter is that top planets have napped the universe and thus aren't recieving incs. Cath, as always, is the strongest attacking race, and due to the fact that they aren't getting incs are prospering bigtime. It wouldnt have mattered if the beetle was 20% less effective or 20% more effective, the caths would still roid and init like crazy and would still get 0 incs. WHy is this so hard for you to understand. |
Re: Stats maker
The biggest thing is how op cath is at covopping and with covop beeing freexp its hard to balance em good enough for the once not using covop and not too strong for the ones using it.
|
Re: Stats maker
Cov opping is not free XP. It costs value. That may not be the best exchange, because value grows exponentially, while XP grows linearly. There is a break even point, and whether cov opping is a net positive to your planet depends on whether that point is before or after tick 1177.
And just to be cover all my bases, though it's irrelevant: obviously that does not apply to small planets that mostly do bank hacking, because they gain score and value. |
Re: Stats maker
the def ships that are required to defend vs an EMP attack do make a significant impact on the effectiveness, they're all pretty weak vs emp. for example xan fi can't touch an emp planet (cat/etd) or terran due to war frigs, they can really only his xan or zik. I think if stats were tweaked with a lowering of EMP eff you would see a completely different political make up as well as a completely different make up of the top planets
|
Re: Stats maker
Cutlass, wraith and Lancers are all fine against cath co. The problem is that due to not getting incs, the caths spores can spam so much beetles that they simply overwhelm the fico defence. If every zik could invest 75% of their value in cutlass caths obviously wouldnt be able to hit them.
Hint: Cath co fleets have almost no vipers, build some DEs and they cant hit you. |
Re: Stats maker
umm, xan can't build de.
|
Re: Stats maker
Quote:
|
Re: Stats maker
Well, every race bar xan and cat can.
|
Re: Stats maker
To be honest, IsilX / Blue_Esper. You're both right to a point, EMP is OP as has been discussed previously but also Spore have played this rnd very well politically and have avoided almost all incs. This has led to the fact of the OP'ing of EMP to really show. The argument for EMP being OP was that any EMP planet would have to build a number of different ships but everyone knows if you go EMP you build mass co, irrelevant of what the stats are (to a point).
Anyway, congrats to Spore on this rnd so far. They have won on ship strat / politics and gameplay so far. Pretty shameful that no ally would even take them on except Ult tho. Quite pathetic tbh. Also IsilX overall your stats pwn so thanks for a good set. The criticism about EMP is nit picking in reality tbh. |
Re: Stats maker
Quote:
Thus giving you both xp and value, and yes caths are in that sense superior to other potential top 10. Ofc.it requires the chain researched, and I reckon most if not all top 10 planets during a not spcified round are busy with htc and scans. |
Re: Stats maker
Quote:
Let's step away from cold hard facts for a moment and look at how bank hacking works. The bigger your target, the more resources you can steal, up to 8k per agent at 4 times your value. Planets in the top 10 have few targets available, so they'll always hit at or (more likely) below their own value. At a generous 2/3 of your own value, you can get 4000 resources per agent per cov op, but each agent in an op costs 1500 resources to use. On top of that, each agent costs 6000 resources to train, and will cost another 1500 for the op on when it dies. That means that an agent needs to succeed (6000 + 1500) / (4000 - 1500) = 3 times to break even in value (success rate: 75%). Add to that the cost of finding targets (~2500 per attempt at finding a stockpile, and another ~5000 to detect SCs), and you'll find that you actually lose resources if you fail more than about 1 in 6 to 8 attempts (success rate: ~84-88%) . And keep in mind: breaking even is not good enough: if you'd invested those resources in your fleet instead, you would've been able to cap more roids, on average, allowing value gain, not just value stability. Going back to the cov oppers in the top 10 and 50. Do our 10 high value cov oppers hit that success rate? No. The average success rate among them is 78.8% or 79.4% (depending on which method you use), which are both significantly below our break even point. The 4 most active cov oppers among them, including the 2 in the top 10, have a success rate of, respectively: 67.7% (10:4:6, big loss), 80.4% (7:8:5, small loss), 95.1% (2:1:4, possible gain) and 80.8% (2:1:1, small loss). If we look more closely at 2:1:4, we see he's top 2 in value. This means it's unlikely he's hitting at 2/3 of his value, which erodes any potential gains. And he's not even Cat. So no. |
Re: Stats maker
It's basically because they're doing it wrong, and to a point you're argumenting wrong.
What you need to do is find 3-5 targets and cycle them, thus not using value on scans every time. It's important that these targets are inactive and holding a reasonable pool of resources. Trust me they exist. now all you need to aim for is hacking 3000 of each resource, (2500 for the mission cost, and 500 each for - over time, covering the hiring, the initial scan for finding the planets (those should be few no more than 10 scans of each, if you know what you're looking for, using tools) As the game runs these days, you can actually get it free on #scans on irc the odd fail (allthough those should be few, as your target is an inactive git,, so you can predict the alert fot every mission) Let's say that amounts to 100000 of each resource over the lenght of a round that would give you room for 30 failed missions + some, you shouldn't have more fails, or you're doing it wrong. So over a rounds lenght 1177 ticks you need with the above example, 200 succesful missions in 230 attempts to break even. As a cath you can manage a few more than 230 over a round :) Now this is a theoretical discussion because few are willing to sacrifice research points at an early stage in the round, especially those going for top 10 or 50. If the bank hack was 50 research ticks faster done on average, I think it would be viable for most if not all cath to go fast bank hack. Again that would mean 100+ planets suddenly back hacking away, increasing the failure chance. So yes and no |
Re: Stats maker
Of course they're doing it wrong. My point is that they can't do it right. And as for idle targets, they do exist, just not in the top 100.
|
Re: Stats maker
Its not that covop standalone is great that makes it good, its that its on top of everything else you do. So if you are online to check pa 12 ticks a day its a easy choice to go covop if you wanna compete in the top(this doesnt mean that you have to do so, just that it gives you an advantage)
But most people just follow the style they're comfortable with and think is the way to go. Thats why we have so many planets with 60 fcs averaging 600-700 roids during a round, they simply dont know whats the best, tho they think they do. And yeah 7500 recources for a 5 agent covop is free in my eyes. 75 value for 1200 score. Thats a good trade. And shipvalue is at best a tiny bit exponential, Id say its very close to linear |
Re: Stats maker
One change to initiative would have made these stats play way differently.
Pegs init 9>5 Yahtzee |
Re: Stats maker
Quote:
Just found out that the usual ship kill covop is now a ship steal covop, with a rather drastic improvement on value. Same strategy implies, cycle 3-5 targets with some sort of useless fleet. 10 agents minimum, so a 5k each res to spend, with an outcome 3 times as big, in terms of value of stolen ships. I'm inclined to belive this is a better way to justify covop for value, as a cath, as you can pick cath targs, boots your fleet, gaining more value than spent, and as plaguu puts it, get a significant score boost on xp while doing it. win/win. |
Re: Stats maker
I think these stats are boring cus they are too one dimensonal. Id like some more tactical openings.
|
Re: Stats maker
Could you give an example of a tactical opening?
|
Re: Stats maker
Quote:
Like FR r50. |
Re: Stats maker
EVery race(bar zik) have at least two viable roiding fleets, which can be faked. And as many ziks have stolen co, they also have two viable roiding fleets. Ters can ship covop fi pods, caths can ship covop bs pods, there are endless possibilities if you know what you're doing. I don't see how there are tactical openings lacking?
|
Re: Stats maker
Quote:
|
Re: Stats maker
Completely disagree, every race is very open to at least one shipsclass*
*only possible exception being terrans whoring de with a little bit of war frigs and wyvs on the side |
Re: Stats maker
Can we please get this thread back on topic. Who is going to start making next rounds stats.
|
Re: Stats maker
Quote:
|
Re: Stats maker
Quote:
As i said when Isil posted his stats as final, the amount of whining about them would be testament to their level and decency. Apart from a small whine about EMP eff (which Appoco normally fiddles with are they are final) only you has had anything to say about them. So well done Isil, great set, been really enjoyable. This round is a fail because of politics, no ideals of stats ever survives contact with the playerbase. We have had rounds with the out of proportion stats that you crave Bitcher and invariably they are awful rounds. Maybe not for those playing the overly OP race but for everyone else they are. BUt anyway politics has destroyed this round. Spore should be congratulated for managing to get everyone to leave them alone, almost to the point where is it comical and really a lot of the alliances below them should be looking at why they play as a full tag alliance in this game, i cannot believe that every alliance in this game with over 45 members went into the round happy to finish 2nd and that they are all so bitter and twisted that they could not see the threat that Spore posed to the universe from about tick 200. Seriously people need to step up, and i dont care who, and work together more for a common goal. |
Re: Stats maker
okay just to clarify, I don't remember having had any stats offered for this round, it'd be good if anyone is willing to step forward.
I thought that Isilx had already sorted a set but just realised that was for this round. oopsie me :) |
Re: Stats maker
I propose re-using, with minor updates, an "old" set for next round.
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 00:48. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018