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
 

Yeah that would be cool. Person who names the round gets a credit so why not the stat maker too. Take it from the winner of the tag comp. Why we still have this is ridiculous. 'Yeah lets give a ton of credits to ND who have won this forever'.

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.

God help us all.

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
 

yeah im happy with your stats apart from the hug of emp and perhaps swapping of ERes of phant with banshee.
threepod classes sounds great!

Re: Stats maker
 

yeah maybe we´d get cath stats that arent totally op

and i´d 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
 

I presume you mean a de roiding fleet

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
 

It's easy to find covop targets for bank hack, as a big planet (even top 10). That said, ofc. the res gain is less, however it's more than enough to cover your expenses for doing the cov op, and more.

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
 

OK, so let's look at those planets. There are 2 top 100 cov op planets in the top 10, at least one of who has not bank hacked. There are another 8 in the top 11-50, at least one of who has not bank hacked either, and another 2 are low on value, supporting my theory even if they had. Only 4 of them are Cat, and that's not the end-all be-all of cov opping: Etd and Zik have more stealth (enabling a higher success rate). The only advantage Cat gets is that they can double their gains. But double of 0 is still 0. So what kind of gains could you get when you're a top 10 cov op planet?

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
 

As a sidenote, covop these days seem to favour value gain a bit more than it used to.

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
 

Yes.
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
 

There is to me, no loopholes. All races seems more or less very balanced

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
 

Yeah this is what im saying, they are very balanced. Rather have more defensive stats with one race wich can attack all the races easily.

Re: Stats maker
 

The last few posts you have made on here are utter shit, sorry but they are. Why do you have this belief that the stats have some major effect on the round? They really dont.

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.