Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gate
Looking at the stats, I honestly can't see how the balance is 'shit'.
|
I wouldn't say these stats are at all unbalanced but the way in which that balance was achieved was to systematically make every race and their fleets universally mediocre. I believe the appropriate phrase is "killed in committee." As a result, no race is actually especially good at anything and instead everyone has a couple of equally unattractive attack options with a few races getting a good old-fashioned glaring weakness or some bizarre efficiencies. Surely there are better ways to find an overall balance than this?
Just as one example, what's wrong with having certain races good at different things, like in your first set? In that iteration xan had a very good to excellent Fi/Co fleet but their Fr was hella gay and the cost to stop Cr/BS with Cr of your own was prohibitive and not really all the much better anyway. But NOOOOOOOOO, heaven forbid that it should be possible to solo attack a race loss free. That's just anti Planetarion is what that is. (As I recall Xan with Fi/Co, Ter with BS, Cat with any fleet, Zik with stealing and ETD had something too but I can't remember offhand and this post has already taken way too long as indeed has this section in brackets.)
To quickly summarise, the first iteration was interesting with some nice trade offs between real strengths and weaknesses. By the fourth iteration it's much more a case of closing your eyes, gritting your teeth, sticking your hand in the bucket and grabbing a turd.