Planetarion Forums

Planetarion Forums (https://pirate.planetarion.com/index.php)
-   Strategic Discussions (https://pirate.planetarion.com/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   Roid mayhem? (https://pirate.planetarion.com/showthread.php?t=201397)

lurchleaf 28 Jul 2017 10:45

Roid mayhem?
 
With the spirit of freshening things up a little, I'd like to suggest a small change for a future round..

One random asteroid per tick for every planet or, if it's easier to code, one of each type every tick.
Lower research points for mining techs to counterbalance.

Meaning all inactives are still good targets, costly initiating will be minimised, smaller players will not be as disheartened..


Just an idea, any thoughts on improving this?

Lukey 28 Jul 2017 14:55

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Sounds a fun variant, maybe test it out in a havoc/christmas round to see how it impacts things.

Paisley 28 Jul 2017 15:12

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
yer I like the idea worth running in the xmas round

Kaiba 29 Jul 2017 01:07

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
1 of each roid per tick is quite a lot. That's 72 roids a day, 504 a week, 3528 a round. That's more than anyone had at any point in Rd 72, it's more than quite a few galaxies finished with!!!

You need maybe one of each every 2 hrs. That's 36 a day, 252 a week, 1764 a round. It's not enough to make you competitive whilst doing nothing but enough to keep inactive planets fat.

If there was a 'exploit' worry with farming inactives etc then possibly have it so it needs to be collected or 50% will pay out automatically every 7 days, something like that

lurchleaf 29 Jul 2017 06:26

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
It does indeed, Kaiba.
This would of course be balanced by the fact everyone is getting them, nothing unfair there :)

Or, another suggestion..
One asteroid of each type per tick if a user is under 500 (750, 1000, or any chosen amount of asteroids) in total.

Mzyxptlk 29 Jul 2017 07:50

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
This is a bad idea. When inactive planets have shittons of roids, that's all the active players will attack. There will be (even) fewer wars and the game will be less fun.

CBA 29 Jul 2017 11:30

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk (Post 3259438)
This is a bad idea. When inactive planets have shittons of roids, that's all the active players will attack. There will be (even) fewer wars and the game will be less fun.

The point is the inactive planets will never have a 'shitton' of roids. They will be roided by the smaller active planets / smaller allies and in turn feed the universe with more roids.

It means there will be more roids in circulation. Bigger landings - Better targets = More fun

Mzyxptlk 29 Jul 2017 12:06

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Where the roids come from matters.0000

(I put some zeroes at the end of that sentence so you'll like have more fun reading it.)

CBA 29 Jul 2017 13:55

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk (Post 3259441)
Where the roids come from matters.0000

(I put some zeroes at the end of that sentence so you'll like have more fun reading it.)

Lokken or anyone else can you moderate Mz's posts?? A lot of the time it's just brainless sarcasm with no real relevance to the topic, or PA in general.

lokken 29 Jul 2017 17:02

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by CBA (Post 3259447)
Lokken or anyone else can you moderate Mz's posts?? A lot of the time it's just brainless sarcasm with no real relevance to the topic, or PA in general.

Looks fine to me. Maybe having a sly dig on SD is not necessarily the done thing but it's still fairly civil.

Mzyxptlk 29 Jul 2017 17:27

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
I object to being called brainless.

Anyway, if we're all done tone policing, the point I was making was not that there will be individual inactive planets with shittons of roids, but that there will be a shitton of roids to be had on inactive planets in aggregate. This will change the balance between getting roids through warring planets/alliances relatively close to your own score/rank and easy 3-fleet bottom feeding inactives near your bash limit, in favour of the latter. Personally, I think that'll make the game more boring and less fun.

Kaiba 29 Jul 2017 17:35

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Actually mzs post is completely on point.

We actually steal a percentage of roids, the amount stolen is only relevant in that the more roids people have the bigger the gap between those who keep them and those who don't gets, creating a boring environment where a few people pull away from the rest and are able to get a position quickly where it's hard to take those roids from them.

In a round with less roids the incentive to roid is higher as it is more about capturing the roids (xp) rather than what those roids give (value). This creates a more dynamic environment with lots of position swapping and combat.

So more stuff = more fun is wrong.

More competition = more fun is more accurate.

lurchleaf 30 Jul 2017 02:34

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
I hate to quote myself here but..

Quote:

Originally Posted by lurchleaf (Post 3259437)
Or, another suggestion..
One asteroid of each type per tick if a user is under 500 (750, 1000, or any chosen amount of asteroids) in total.



Some of you seem concerned about this being unbalanced without offering an alternative solution ..we have invisible ships flying about, this is marginally more unfair than lowbies generating additional rocks each tick! :D


Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaiba (Post 3259451)
We actually steal a percentage of roids, the amount stolen is only relevant in that the more roids people have the bigger the gap between those who keep them and those who don't gets, creating a boring environment where a few people pull away from the rest and are able to get a position quickly where it's hard to take those roids from them.

In a round with less roids the incentive to roid is higher as it is more about capturing the roids (xp) rather than what those roids give (value). This creates a more dynamic environment with lots of position swapping and combat.

In the current environment many players team up to roid larger targets. The proposed solution would indeed create fatter planets, but one would assume they would be decimated by multi-fleet attacks.


Quote:

Originally Posted by CBA (Post 3259440)
The point is the inactive planets will never have a 'shitton' of roids. They will be roided by the smaller active planets / smaller allies and in turn feed the universe with more roids.

It means there will be more roids in circulation. Bigger landings - Better targets = More fun

Spot on, can't agree more :up:

Cochese 30 Jul 2017 04:46

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Probably deserves another thread, but what about re-introducing the bot-planet galaxy I think used to be 1:2?

They had some roids, built some ships, and half assed defended each other.

Active planets have enough incentive to remain active. Not sure what the criteria are for planets to enter c200, but might aswell just do away with that and let idle planets essentially become 'farms'.

CBA 30 Jul 2017 09:56

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk (Post 3259449)
I object to being called brainless.

Anyway, if we're all done tone policing, the point I was making was not that there will be individual inactive planets with shittons of roids, but that there will be a shitton of roids to be had on inactive planets in aggregate. This will change the balance between getting roids through warring planets/alliances relatively close to your own score/rank and easy 3-fleet bottom feeding inactives near your bash limit, in favour of the latter. Personally, I think that'll make the game more boring and less fun.

That is more in line with the post I was after from you....

I think our differing opinion stems from the following:

You believe by bottom feeding a normal planet will reap more rewards then by hitting up or hitting a normal active planet. *Normal being your avg ND planet logs in throughout the day, maybe wakes once a night - playing for value & XP*

I believe a normal active planet will bottom feed a little for sure. However they will need to hit elsewhere for XP especially as Value increases etc...

Kaiba 30 Jul 2017 11:31

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by CBA (Post 3259477)
That is more in line with the post I was after from you....

I think our differing opinion stems from the following:

You believe by bottom feeding a normal planet will reap more rewards then by hitting up or hitting a normal active planet. *Normal being your avg ND planet logs in throughout the day, maybe wakes once a night - playing for value & XP*

I believe a normal active planet will bottom feed a little for sure. However they will need to hit elsewhere for XP especially as Value increases etc...

Have you never watched any decent late starters bottom feed for t10 finishes?

CBA 31 Jul 2017 10:02

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaiba (Post 3259479)
Have you never watched any decent late starters bottom feed for t10 finishes?

Late starters haven't been around for a while, right?


It is getting harder and harder to pick off planets in smaller tags. As the influx of new players doesn't increase. Players are getting more clued up with the game & defence has become Universally more profound.

Inactive planets will simply not have the value / score to be targetted by top planets. Especially in the forthcoming, I predict, value round. They will feed the Universe more roids though as weaker planets in the lower tags will be able to gain more roids - attack more with better profits & generally enjoy the landing aspect of the game a lot more..

Kaiba 31 Jul 2017 11:05

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by CBA (Post 3259498)
Late starters haven't been around for a while, right?


It is getting harder and harder to pick off planets in smaller tags. As the influx of new players doesn't increase. Players are getting more clued up with the game & defence has become Universally more profound.

Inactive planets will simply not have the value / score to be targetted by top planets. Especially in the forthcoming, I predict, value round. They will feed the Universe more roids though as weaker planets in the lower tags will be able to gain more roids - attack more with better profits & generally enjoy the landing aspect of the game a lot more..

I think it's only 1 round since late starts were stopped, might be 2 though. Point is if people want to bottom feed and get protected to dump big score later in the round they will. Covoping for 300 ticks for example then getting pods.

Also you are aware you completely contradicted yourself saying its going to be a value round and then saying there will be more lands.

These back up stats have got to be one of the worst I have ever seen. Only people clinging onto the love of their race will stop this being a 100% de fort round.

Good luck with that!

Paisley 31 Jul 2017 13:10

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaiba (Post 3259499)

These back up stats have got to be one of the worst I have ever seen. Only people clinging onto the love of their race will stop this being a 100% de fort round.

Good luck with that!

having the back up stats was the result of you not compromising on having extra pod classes and being naive that folk wont farm for pods. Little options was left in the choice of stats.

Kaiba 31 Jul 2017 13:55

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Paisley (Post 3259501)
having the back up stats was the result of you not compromising on having extra pod classes and being naive that folk wont farm for pods. Little options was left in the choice of stats.

Please.... it was a minority and very rare my set would have been used regardless of pod amount. To honestly believe that everybody is intent on stealing pods or that it would even benefit anyone to do so in my set is the definition of naivety. Organised pod farming is beyond 95% of the player base and the 5% that do would be doing it regardless, they are more limited in how they do it normally.

Mzyxptlk 31 Jul 2017 15:35

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Kaiba, there's no guarantee compromising would've resulted in the selection of your set, but a more flexible attitude would've certainly increased your odds. Turning around and passing the blame to Jintao while ignoring the part you played by refusing to make his other option more palatable is dishonest.

Patrikc 31 Jul 2017 19:13

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaiba (Post 3259502)
Please.... it was a minority and very rare my set would have been used regardless of pod amount. To honestly believe that everybody is intent on stealing pods or that it would even benefit anyone to do so in my set is the definition of naivety. Organised pod farming is beyond 95% of the player base and the 5% that do would be doing it regardless, they are more limited in how they do it normally.

It's without question that stealing pods would benefit certain strats, I'm not sure how you can call that naivety aside from trying to discredit those disagreeing with you.

I also think you are, either consciously or subconsciously, misrepresenting the argument for adding the third pod; it's not that most people would resort to cheating (though some certainly would and be at a bigger advantage than usual because of it), it's that without access to a third pod, strategies to land reliably would be severely limited.

Take Terran for example: it has no partner for either of its attack classes, and both have a ship that prefires it (one with barely any losses, or even stealing at a slight value gain depending on Ter composition). Without Cat De finding pods, the best it could do is team its De with Zik Co.

All that being said, I'm not sure why we went with R70s stats and made them worse. I'd have much preferred your flawed stats than play De forts with everyone.

Kaiba 31 Jul 2017 20:13

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk (Post 3259503)
Kaiba, there's no guarantee compromising would've resulted in the selection of your set, but a more flexible attitude would've certainly increased your odds. Turning around and passing the blame to Jintao while ignoring the part you played by refusing to make his other option more palatable is dishonest.

I'm not blaming Jintao, he did what he could in a short space of time. Once again I was flexible BUT I was not going to completed change the whole mantra of my set to satisfy a few whingers.

As Patrikc says there is a plethora of other sets that could have been played, this one was a poor choice. Fort stats are dull with this playerbase, in a summer round even more so.

Can you genuinely say this set is more appealing or compelling than what I offered? I think the answer is no.

Mzyxptlk 31 Jul 2017 22:32

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
You're probably getting tired of hearing it, but since you keep asking me to repeat my opinion... My issue with your set was never about quality or balance or appeal, but about how profitable they made cheating.

Patrikc 31 Jul 2017 23:17

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk (Post 3259510)
You're probably getting tired of hearing it, but since you keep asking me to repeat my opinion... My issue with your set was never about quality or balance or appeal, but about how profitable they made cheating.

Whinger!

Kaiba 1 Aug 2017 01:06

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk (Post 3259510)
You're probably getting tired of hearing it, but since you keep asking me to repeat my opinion... My issue with your set was never about quality or balance or appeal, but about how profitable they made cheating.

I appreciate were you played so you answer will be skewed but how many people in this game now have the skill, time or effort to set up and benefit from pod farming?

I am not bored of opinions and I actually appreciate the concerns. I personally find them unfounded. There was an exploit with def xp, only one guy took advantage more than was considered fair. There was a way to stay c200, only 1-2 people did that. You could fund a galwin off covops, only 1 person in 1 gal did that. You can ALWAYS bash the hell outta noobs and stay small, waiting for your escort to greatness, only 2-3 same people did that. 1 guy got his bp to donate all to him at tickstart even! It's a recurring theme here, not even a handful each time, no huge underground club, no sophisticated network of devious scroundels. Just the odd person or persons time and time again, bending and breaking the rules as we know it, all with 1 alliance in common.

Cochese 1 Aug 2017 02:28

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Might be time to split this thread, since the OP has gotten lost.

No one has addressed my points, so hopefully we can part ways there.

Mzyxptlk 1 Aug 2017 09:13

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaiba (Post 3259513)
I appreciate were you played so you answer will be skewed but how many people in this game now have the skill, time or effort to set up and benefit from pod farming?

I think you underestimate how easy it is. Sign up a planet at a public wireless access point and build some pods. Go home. Steal the pods. Unless you never actually leave your house, it takes about 5 minutes of actual extra work to pull off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaiba (Post 3259513)
There was an exploit with def xp, only one guy took advantage more than was considered fair. There was a way to stay c200, only 1-2 people did that. You could fund a galwin off covops, only 1 person in 1 gal did that. You can ALWAYS bash the hell outta noobs and stay small, waiting for your escort to greatness, only 2-3 same people did that. 1 guy got his bp to donate all to him at tickstart even! It's a recurring theme here, not even a handful each time, no huge underground club, no sophisticated network of devious scroundels. Just the odd person or persons time and time again, bending and breaking the rules as we know it, all with 1 alliance in common.

This is going to sound like a cop-out, but I don't want to call out people by name or alliance, lest this devolve into an AD flamewar. I could do it subtly, I suppose, between the lines, but that wouldn't really change anything.

I believe there's still sufficiently many people willing to cheat for advantages much smaller than receiving a whole new roiding fleet that it's a good idea to avoid unnecessarily incentivizing it.

Having utterly failed to answer your question, let me ask one in return anyway: why were you so insistent that the third pod had to be stolen? What about that was so important that you'd rather have your stats stay 'pure' than make them more palatable to the people who objected to that feature?

Kaiba 1 Aug 2017 14:42

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk (Post 3259517)
I think you underestimate how easy it is. Sign up a planet at a public wireless access point and build some pods. Go home. Steal the pods. Unless you never actually leave your house, it takes about 5 minutes of actual extra work to pull off.


This is going to sound like a cop-out, but I don't want to call out people by name or alliance, lest this devolve into an AD flamewar. I could do it subtly, I suppose, between the lines, but that wouldn't really change anything.

I believe there's still sufficiently many people willing to cheat for advantages much smaller than receiving a whole new roiding fleet that it's a good idea to avoid unnecessarily incentivizing it.

Having utterly failed to answer your question, let me ask one in return anyway: why were you so insistent that the third pod had to be stolen? What about that was so important that you'd rather have your stats stay 'pure' than make them more palatable to the people who objected to that feature?

Because it was the original starting concept, the first decision made on how the set would look. Everything else was based off that. I know will constantly disagree with the small few who want 3 pods but that's just how it is. Also if I bend on something so fundamental to my vision of what I created then that opens the floodgates to everyone else to ask for changes on everything.

In equavilent to inventing spaghetti bolognese and being told I need to change the pasta to rice. Just not going to happen.

Patrikc 2 Aug 2017 00:40

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaiba (Post 3259519)
Because it was the original starting concept, the first decision made on how the set would look. Everything else was based off that. I know will constantly disagree with the small few who want 3 pods but that's just how it is. Also if I bend on something so fundamental to my vision of what I created then that opens the floodgates to everyone else to ask for changes on everything.

In equavilent to inventing spaghetti bolognese and being told I need to change the pasta to rice. Just not going to happen.

I'd say it's more like saying your dish desperately needs extra seasoning, but you think it tastes fine without.

But if you say not having that third pod is fundamental to your stats, then perhaps it's best not to use a fundamentally flawed set.

Forest 4 Aug 2017 12:57

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
Surely we should be doing stats 2 or 3 rounds in advance anyway?

[DDK]gm 4 Aug 2017 13:45

Re: Roid mayhem?
 
no, we just reuse the old stats every 3 rounds now!


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 21:59.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2002 - 2018