Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk
I don't think you do see it. The stats are universal. If they hurt one alliance's ability to defend, it hurts all alliances' ability to defend, and equally. With ST stats, Ultores will be worse defensively than they are with MT stats, just like Conspiracy will be worse with ST stats than with MT stats. What I'm arguing against is the notion that an alliance like Conspiracy will be more worse with ST stats than Ultores. I just don't think that follows.
If people are proposing ST stats with the intention to hurt Ultores, they're not going to achieve their goals.
|
Then I guess we will disagree, I believe the difference the way you build fleets between ST and MT stats hampers the less organised defensively alliances. People in these alliances have to dilute their builds into more ships because they cannot rely on defence from others meaning that overall they have their defence ships spread thin over more members. For example they will all have 5k anti cr and 5k anti bs for a bit of self def and to stop getting podded. The alliances that cab rely on defenders however will be happier to leave gaps as they know they will get covered (or at least have a far higher chance of getting it) this ends up meaning that ppl will build 10k anti cr and no anti be and another member will build vice versa. This allows them to expend less fleets to cover incs whilst still having a higher responsive def pool.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mz
I'm not sure if this is aimed at me, but I'm intentionally staying away from the pro-ST or anti-ST debate. I'm merely pointing out the flaws I see in one part of the discussion.
|
It wasn't, it was general statement aimed at those that can't see past the rose tinted specs they wear