Re: R66 ship stats
 

Most people can and the ones that cant have no inclination to vote.

There's a reason why people want a vote because the majority don't want patrikc's fort extraordinaire stats. They want versatility. That signifies they can read stats just fine.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Democracy is not a good way to pick a set of stats. A bad reason for picking a set of stats ("I really like the name 'Pegasus'!") would carry just as much weight as a good reason for picking one ("These stats are balanced and have a variety of interesting interactions that are likely to make for a fun round").

A better prototype would be the (European) court system, where people in favour of various sets of stats set forth their arguments, and a relatively neutral third party decides which set of arguments is best. That third party is PA Team. Everyone else can provide arguments and evidence, and their relative strengths will determine which set 'wins'.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Supposing you are right then how does is matter?
If alliances are deciding that they won't play actively but instead intend to xp, idle, troll, fc or whatever then these people voting as directed by their hcs would be an accurate reflection of what the usage of the stats would be even if not perhaps everyone's opinion.

Essentially even if we assume you are correct about players abilities to read stats that does not mean that a poll won't be an accurate reflection of opinions or of what alliances believe.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

What matrix? :p

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Nice to see all the repliers didn't bother reading m0s post.

Having a poll in-game means that EVERYONE can vote, every person that has no clue how to read stats has the same say as someone who is well versed in reading them. This is great for simple questions but in regards to something that requires actual ability it's a disaster waiting to happen.


Mr noob makes a planet and is instantly asked to vote on two sets of numbers he has no idea about. His opinion carries as much weight as Patrikc the stat veteran in this system, yeah sounds great.

Also what is the betting that if a fort set was against a xp set that certain alliances would team up to make sure the vote was in their favour.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Really kaiba, what percentage of players signing up before tick start are actually new to the game? Almost everyone will have played before and have some familiarity with stats. The majority will likely discuss the poll with their alliance mates.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Well actually 'new players' seems to be a favourite of yours when debating stuff.

Your belief that that almost everyone will have a fimilatlrity with stats to the point of being able to pick one set over another is ridiculous. There are ppl out there who play Xan cos they like the colour green for god's sake. Why don't we throw open every little decision to the moronic masses and end up with an entirely unplayable game.

If the majority are going to do what their alliance says then why bother having a player vote, have an alliance vote, or as most are in pre formed blocks have a block vote.

How about this for a crazy idea, let the PA team pick as it has done for the last 65 rounds, the game hasn't imploded from them doing that yet. If Appoco had more free time we wouldn't even have this thread, as he would just make the stats and be done with it.

There is a reason that only 5-10 ppl ever manage to get a stat set together, because it is a lot harder than it looks and THE MAJORITY don't even know what half the numbers actually mean. If you are the representative of the masses then please stick your set up here and we can all vote... for Patrikc's.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

That you would vote for Patrikc's says a lot about either your ability to read stats poorly or to not respect the wishes of people to not have to play in forts to have any slither of enjoyment...

Either way, it says a lot about you.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Tbh, I think if I presented here a set of stats from a previous round without any modification (without informing this ofc), I would get a lot of critics.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

so this stats gonna be used for sure??

we used to check between more then one set, debate, and appoco pick one in the end.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

The only issue with patrikcs set is the fort aspect. As a set of stats on face value they are balanced. Intact there has been very little mentioned about changes, just the style of play they represent. But this leads more to my point that people have massive variations on opinion on a single set so how could 2 sets be open to public voting. People always want a personal advantage, so they will pick at things in stats to better themselves rather than thinking of the bigger picture

Re: R66 ship stats
 

This is actually quite right. The balancing is decent, some small issues, but I guess they know about it. The fort aspect is what's bothering quite a lot of ppl.

Not sure if voteing would be the way to go, but maybe the #stats channel or get a bigger stats team from various alliances would be a better way to sort stats? This have been brought up before, just having one guy(+ Jintao checking them) isn't the best solution. Propose a set, get feedback from an "appointed" team, edit before releasing. The forum isn't really well suited for stats discuission.

This might not be 100% accurate, but from talks I had with ppl then P3N, Norse, CT, Ult (based on comments of possible tactics, they might be happy with the tactic) isn't particular happy with the stats. This is 4 out of top 5 from last round. Not sure Norse deserves to be mentioned with the rest as a serious alliance, but 3 out of 4 top alliances then.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

This isn't about personal advantage...it's about variation and not sending everyone down the same path.

The games already gotten way to simple, boring and tedious e.g. with the nerfing of MC's. You're basically limiting people to "this is the way you have to play". Why? Why can't we have variation?

It's easy to play any set of stats as a fort...not so easy to play any set as a random

The way the people in charge think here is so narrow minded and stuck in its ways. It's like the Arsene Wenger managerial philosophy applied to PA.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

There is actually plenty of variety with Pats set, you have all just jumped on the fort bandwagon and started pouring a big glass of whine.

The fact you are all so narrow minded and fully believe every piece of bullshit your cronies tell you is what is wrong with you.

No one is forced to fort you are all just scared that ult will fort and do it better than you. Nothing in these stats is weak except the creativity of those that look at them.

Finally if you don't like what the option is then go and play ad2460 for a bit, it will help you remember how good and diverse and free of constraints PA actually is

Re: R66 ship stats
 

If you think voting is good, then you've just highlighted a problem with voting, which is a strange contradiction.

If you think voting is bad, then Kaiba's vote for or against whatever doesn't matter.

Either way, you have no argument.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

I realised this Mz tbh. I don't particularly want a vote hence why I didn't say so in my post. I actually just want the admin team to listen for once and stop going down the same sh*t route.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Back on topic... can anyone just post some alternative (and viable) stats? I don't entirely agree on having a simple vote... but putting 2 choices into the mix and then arguing for each is likely the best method to come to an agreement here.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

*shrugs* The link to pat's stats in this post hasn't been valid for like 4 days now. So i'm not sure about which stats most of you have been talking.

Correct link: http://beta.planetarion.com/manual.pl?page=stats

Secondly tomorrow at ~9 GMT we'll have a beta session with pat's stats on http://beta.planetarion.com to see if they play out too forty or not.

I invite you all to come and try them and give an informed opinion about them and not just based on your first impression of what might not even have been the right set of stats. Please play them as if you would in a real round and see for yourself if they are too forty or not.

Pat's set is almost ST which means that where in any other fort round you would have 2 ships that target atleast 4 classes or 3 ships which target atleast 5 classes. His set will only target 4 classes over 3 ships. Which already nerfs the effectiveness of the fort. Plus the fact that almost every build needs 5 ships means your value will be spread out thin if you want to be able to defend.

These 2 factors hopefully reduce the power of forts enough for them to be playable. But I invite you to come find out for youself tomorrow at ~9 GMT.

PS take into account pat's set isn't final since work has stopped on them since this discussion started. Mostly emp and emp armor still need to be balanced peopzely.

I'm also open to having any kind of adult discussion with anyone about them. You can always find me on IRC in #beta.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

I don't see any reference to galaxy size in the announcement. Patrikc, does that impact your view of your stats?


P.S. Beta is pointless. But have fun.

[edit] I'll explain that last statement. Forting relies on cooperation, defense, intelligence. On a beta server, with fast ticks, in a small universe, in a 'round' that does not matter, there are not enough people to cooperate, you have to be online every X minutes, rather than once a night, and there aren't enough people to form more than a couple of full-size galaxies anyway. Even if the stats are super-forty, you will see no forts in a beta round. The same is true, for some reason or another, for nearly all other things you might want to test on the beta server. Not only is it useless, it is actively misinforming.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

I thought about denying this... But it is probably true enough, whether pa can gain more players is one of my recurring themes on the forums though I did not think it was really coming out over the last round or two!

Your dismissal of everyone's intelligence seems equally baffling to me. Almost all pa players I have played with have had some interest in the stats after their first couple of rounds. Some I agree have peculiar ideas about them but most have perfectly valid readings.

An alliance vote would be a fair enough option for getting general opinion. However I never actually agreed that players would vote with their hc, that was your idea. I am certain that within p3n there would be at least two factions on stats... There always are!

the pa team has in the past been known for making some very odd decisions regarding stats. I am not sure I would trust the pa crew more than players who have been involved in stats for a long time.

What is it about the pa forums that no matter the discussion someone has to launch a personal attack? I have been involved in dozens of these stats discussions, and have made a set myself - unfortunately they were not chosen. If I am representative then I am glad to say that the masses are quite qualified to have an opinion on stats!

However I don't actually have much of an opinion on consulting the players with an ingame poll; I am inclined to think that it would be cutting things too fine in terms of timing, though as you can tell unlike you and mz I think their opinion would be worth having. The problem is if we actaually got opinions there would then be no time to actually take them into account.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

I'd like to know the size of BPs before putting a stamp on the stats in order to possibly make small adjustments.

I just hope Appocomaster isn't waiting with his stamp on BP size until a set has been finalised and chosen!

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Unless something (more) interesting comes up IRL, I'd like to exploit the "alliance fleet" change once it's up on the Beta server.

Otherwise, beta is pointless and I agree with your post.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Guys don't bother debating with Kaiba. He has now become part of the elite as he played some rounds for ultores, so he is now smarter and better than most players

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Well it seems to have won me an admirer :) I always thought it was Bastet and unimatrix that stalked the male pa players, seems they have a new rival :/


Out of interest how much research went into this change? It's quite a major one so I wondered if it was off the cuff or had been extensively vetted and tested first

Re: R66 ship stats
 

The 100 man beta-test team met every friday and saturday evening for 3 weeks to discuss, test and improve this feature.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Which change? The alliance fleets? (please note this is the stats thread not the changes thread)

If this is what you mean then what research can there have been? People would have mentioned it if it had been in a large scale beta. Alliances may have been asked in advance but we would know if players in general had been.
On the other hand I am sure there have been similar ideas mentioned in the suggestions forum for a very long time indeed.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Ahh sorry got mixed on threads

Re: R66 ship stats
 

No it's you stalking Ultores members that shines out here, seems like neither of the two mentioned need to join there :salute:

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Just a tip for the future, doing the cookie monster salute doesn't automatically make your post funny, relevant or cool. In this whole forum I have only addressed one ult person specifically which was agar3s to comment how much his attitude on the forums was a disappointment, on the other hand when I post anywhere here I get my little fan (you) reply without fail to try and make some ridiculous point that never holds weight. It's like clockwork, I can set my day by your presence almost, maybe it's time you got a new hobby, like being good at PA?

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Hahaha. You are a tool. :salute:

Anyways. I'll put my vote in: If the BP system changes to either 2 planets, or 0 planets (and a possible refinement of the exile system... please?)... I find Patrikc's stats to be decent and somewhat playable. I'll reference the other thread: this game is a social experiment of sorts... having gal def oriented stats with 0 bp gals could be kinda interesting and a test for the "best".

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Why cant't etd fi fleet be similar to r61? For a fleet which will have to depend only on itself, it seems rather weak. When in previous sets only one race had FI or CO pods, the ships were either cloak or with good init/emp eff.

Re: R66 ship stats
 

Just so you all know... My cock is the smallest. :salute:

No more spam, or you're banned - Lok

Re: R66 ship stats
 

It's nice to be nice, isn't it?


I've "played Beta" as Xan and Etd so far. They certainly have holes in their stats. It's hard to say how it will play out in a normal round, but I found both to be very playable...when at first I said "meh". to the stat set.

I'll be a happy random piece of furniture next round. Probably Xan. If I had a BP I'd go Etd. Space-bricks will do well. Zik is Zik, as usual. Hugs help.

It's hard to glean anything from a handful of people playing a speedgame. The alliance fleet settings seem to work from what I can tell; if base is set to run, they act like any other fleet out of base.

SK's work just fine, you get a nice reminder about it when trying to launch a fleet with SK's right before the tick. "You are not at war with Ally xyz, the fleet was not launched" or somesuch. This does not "solve" the SK issue, but thats another (ongoing) thread.

Everything else seemed to work as it should. EFF's and INIT's are a bit odd but the game engine behaved itself as far as I could tell.