Stats
 

I heard PA team was working on a new set of stats for rnd 13. (I can be wrong here.) Seems like this is the time to make some suggestions on that front. First of all I have 2 considerations.

1. Combat engine
I heard the combat engine will not change. That means old fashioned stealing or multi tick combat will not return. Subverted ships will be made killable if they succeed in coding that in the current combat engine correctly.

2. Combat
I heard they are not too happy with the current rock/paper/scissor type of combat.

My suggestion:
Increase armor and/or reduce damage. Fix the weakest points in every races fleets. (I know not a very stunnign suggestion.) That will:
1. make attacking easier
2. make it possible to attack more different races without suffering too much damage
3. improve the balance between zik/cath and the other races (subverting/emping will be less effective)
4. make sending hostile defenders less effective (xans defending to help attacking ziks who subvert the xan ships)

Any more ideas? (General ideas plz, I don't expect ' them' to just copy a set of stats you created.)

Re: Stats
 

just improve stats of cathaar defenders.. all i ask.. :rolleyes:

Re: Stats
 

Increase Xan armor slightly, and damage considerably. I want cloaking back, but if that can't happen, at least make them the "low armor, high power" ships they are supposed to be.

Possibly change Vsh targetting to Frigate, and the Arrowhead targetting to Corvette. Make the Voracean a Fighter.

I generally agree with your points Gerbie.

Re: Stats
 

LOL ?

heh.


Just improve the r11 set imho, they are a much better set to base a new set of stats around or something to improve rather than these last rounds work.

Re: Stats
 

As long as at the same time something is done to Ter then as ive found myself to be powerless enough against Xans this round. The way most Xans seem to walk into my planet and kill a good proportion of my fleet with me barely touching theirs is just plain annoying let alone if they would then be more powerful

Re: Stats
 

Likewise as a Xan, with Zik attackers.

Perhaps change the initiative of the Harpy so it actually gets to fire?

Re: Stats
 

with spinner bedridden, i can't see any changes to combat happening

-mist

Re: Stats
 

Stats changes can be implemented, but changes to the main combat engine other than what have already been done are unlikely.

Re: Stats
 

Definately use r11 stats as the base-sheet, those stats were quite decent, just needs slight upgrades to cath and zik.

Re: Stats
 

I could certainly live with that.

Re: Stats
 

I suspect most people could. But really the biggest flaws is the basis that one of the kill races utterly > the other kill race. Imho if you -do- have to stick with racial runaround (rock paper scissor etc) then, it should be something like:

Terran
with Pod1 > Cath + Xand*
with Pod 2 > Zik+Ter*

Cath
with Pod 1 > Xand+Zik*
with Pod 2 > Terr+Cath*

Xand
with pod 1 > Cath+Xand*
with pod 2 > Zik+Ter*

Zik
with pod 1 > Xand+Cath*
with pod 2 > Ter+Zik*

*means the race with the * next to it, will have a "late" option of "anti-pod X" etc, IE: how terrans were easily roided by roach/hornet but terrans could later on "counter" with Hydras straight on etcetc. & How Xands could build Lancers AND Broads to stop zik co/fr etcetc (or well, make it too expensive)

Ofcourse no race should be utterly unstoppable vs another, just an init advantage, efficiency in-terms of armour/damage should be roundabout same allover, cath and zik should definitely NOT be given low inits AND high damage AND high armour - especially to their primary ships, ie what happened this round heh, "weaknesses" should always be allowed, in a way, imho. Cases like the freaking roach+scorpion+tarant where ALL the anti-de/crbar ONE ship - scarab, in the game were inevitably frozen or killed so harshly, due to their absolutely ludicrous efficiency AND THEN damn good armour, must never be repeated.

Re: Stats
 

I must say I agree with what jerome is saying, but theres a lot more to it. In my opinion, 90% of the stats are decided during the beta. Last rounds beta was a joke, where everyone went around screaming to make "their" race better, and half of the participants were actually trying to "win" the beta. Run a proper beta, require every beta participant to submit statsanalysis, and listen to the general opinion of the (non-whining/winning) crowd.

-TheRat

Re: Stats
 

Betas are only effective when you use preset scenarios, most betas you see run are mere speedrounds heh, and those are useless because whatever race is good in the early stagtes (aka Zik) will ofcourse seem overpowered to beta-testers.

Re: Stats
 

Beta testing can be productive if the testers know what they are doing, and why they are there (ie, not for a free speeder). Yes, this means having people like Sid involved again. No, people like that aren't there to "make stats for their alliance". They are there because they are the most qualified people.

It also requires, and this is absolutely imperative, competant people running it and doing the stat changes.

Re: Stats
 

Cochese is 100% correct - you need to have the most competant people helping with the stats. They should of course be completely banned from giving recommendations to their own alliances about stat choices - it's far harder to get an idea of stats as they work in a full round by analysing them as opposed to actually creating them. I know in previous rounds Petru gave no recommendation about stats to RaH, when he was obviously in a position to do so.

(Note: I'm not saying Sid did or didn't give a recommendation to 1up to go Xan last round, or whether that came from another player. I'm just saying we need to make sure it doesn't happen.)

Re: Stats
 

how exctly does designing the stats put you in a better position than just looking at them?

the design process would seem to revolve around looking at them and figuring out how they work, which seems rather similar to looking them over anyway.

that asside, a ban on advising people about what race to go for is stupid for a number of reasons. firstly it means that noone involved with the game (ie, those most competent) would be willing to do it. secondly there's no way of enforcing it, so it's totally worthless and thirdly if the stats are well designed, th advice will be 'go for whichever you fancy - they're all the same' anyway.

-mist

Re: Stats
 

I have no evidence to back it up, but I definitly feel that actually designing the stats themselves is a significant advantage in understanding exactly where the less obvious strategys can be found. Taking last round as an example, the Terrans looked very strong on initial analysis - even by experienced stats people.

If such a ban is that stupid, then why has it been in pace in previous rounds? It's not enforceable as such, but anyone abusing it could be removed from the team in future.

Your final point is correct, but grossly naive. There's always going to be races that are a little stronger than the others.

Re: Stats
 

i believe that the only reason why the team has playing accounts too is for having a "presence" nature of them through the duration of the game so the community can access them through redundant mediums.. other than that, i think theyre gonna be too busy improving the game to be even actually playing their accounts (although their defense responses to each other are pretty damn prompt for some politically sick reason lol!) and actually playing the game with the purpose of being a bigger and better planet each tick like the rest of us are..

Re: Stats
 

I have palyed Xan this round... first time ever I have played Xan , and prolly the last time .. xan/ter stats this round has been terrible.. zik's have been very very very overpowered, xan vs zik with the same value , building around little of everything.. the zik will own the xan without any problems at all.

Xan's can't make an attack without lossing ships, if the defender dont miss out on one type of ships ofc.

Re: Stats
 

so as ever... i take it we won't see any signifcant changes for the upcoming round (no game-essence improving features etc)

Re: Stats
 

You've missed the point a little :D

My comments are about members of the community outside the PATeam being the major players in stat design. For example, Sid designed the R11 stats while being 1up HC.

Re: Stats
 

can tell the people who like to go xan "lets make the race i go the best nana" bleh

Re: Stats
 

If you want to constructively destroy my suggestions, by all means, go right ahead.

However, don't be ignorant...This is the first time I have played Xan since r9, so keep your childish remarks to yourself. My suggestions are based upon my experience with them this round, and against them last round (I was Terran). Nothing more.

Re: Stats
 

Some notes:

1] - everyone who had some common sense recommended xand as the race to go in r11 only because of the heavy percentage of terrans in the universe. By no means, were xand really that overpowered, imho, just remove some damage from fireblade+lancer tbh
2] - Terran appeared like a terrible race to me this round personally, from the start onwards, the mere grip everyone (or so i thought) xanda had on them was enough to make me sure never to pick them, it took gutsy play with fr/de flakking through for losses to make them a workable race, whereas cath had it incredibly easy etc.

Re: Stats
 

your #1 point is presisily why designing the stats is impossible really. The balance of stats does depend alot on the distribution of the races and without having the game force people into a certain race to keep the distribution fairly even your always going to find an inbalance. One race will always seem more powerful than another and will get increased number of people using them and terran will almost always be the most popular as its pretty much the default choice

Oh and Cochese I dont really think you have a case of saying those designing stats do have a greater understanding of them, if you have designed them you will have a better understanding of how they work than someone who doesnt. Ofc you are right that its something that can be reduced over time but they do get an initial jump and can also give their alliance an initial jump on everyone else

Re: Stats
 

To be honest, anyone I spoke to who was a little competant with stats knew that terran was shite this round, so "we were decieved" is bollocks. I knew before I joined the beta, and I was invited to the beta because of my analysis of the stats I saw (without playing). Playing the beta/designing the stats doesnt give an advantage over anyone who knows their way around stats.

Re: Stats
 

i wasn't aware there *was* a ban in force on previous rounds. that said, there being one is little evidence that it's not stupid :)

true enough, no stats are perfect. however, the stats don't need to be perfectly balanced in order for race choice to be unimportant, they just need to be balanced enough so that an alliance requires all the races to function. i seem to remember sid lamenting the fact that loads of 1up went xan, as it made certain defences harder - therefore it seems reasonable to postulate that had he realised this would happen he'd have suggested some go for different races, despite them being 'weaker'.

-mist

Re: Stats
 

He does/did :xmas:

Re: Stats
 

most of 1up went xan because it proved to be the best race by far in the beta test.

the beta was open at one point, with stats out in the open.

so unless you need to be told everything, these things really dont happen

Re: Stats
 

I skipped school to MO the beta, how sad is that? =/

Re: Stats
 

that is pretty ****ing horrible

Re: Stats
 

to be fair i was xan also this round, i found them easily playable, whilst i was a top10 xan the nearest xan was somewhat beyond 50th position. fakes were a perfect stratergy god knows thats how i capped all my roids, the only thing i hated was caths, they had the spider and the scorpion to battle you which i think should be changed, i do agree this round xans did have to actually attack with their larger ships in some scenarios which takes away the identity of xans being able to attack with fighters/corvs and low eta.

Also werent xans designed to loose ships in combat anyway, hence the cheapness and masses they could build? :confused:

Re: Stats
 

Thats true, but their armor was excessively shite, and their damage was piss poor, hence nothing with xan worked as intended.

Re: Stats
 

so basicly, you either had 250 000 FR.

or you attacked planets who were unable to stop like...10k FI ?
tell me who those planets are next round, as I was unable to find anyone THAT shit around.

-there is little difference between efficiency and cost if you look at the other races.

-the massive numbers were just put in to make xan have the traditional "big FI fleet".

Zik had the Rogue, I hear he was able to kill ****loads of FI

Re: [Discuss] Stats
 

stats will most likely be all new the way things are looking atm due to a surprise soon to be announced...