Vice Bust for XP wh0res- an idea to deal with this...

[Nadar]

Originally Posted by cypher

value players don't have that many roids really.. only a few.. and even they don't get even close to the gains an XP player makes, which means it's never gonna work.. not to mention value players will run out of targets while xp players can easily get steady roids day in day out and never run out of targets

Never run out of targets? Mate, try understand: XPwh0res got small fleets at their disposal. They need to find a target which has a loophole that suits their fleet + their targets has to be around 2x their value for max XP. Just because an XPwh0re can attack most planets doesn't mean they can actually land and gain roids from every planet.

I can't really see a valuewh0re running out of targets either unless it got an insanely huge value (as in being a top planet). But that's not a problem now, is it?

[Banned]

Originally Posted by cypher

value players don't have that many roids really.. only a few.. and even they don't get even close to the gains an XP player makes, which means it's never gonna work.. not to mention value players will run out of targets while xp players can easily get steady roids day in day out and never run out of targets

Specifically, the current #1 has earned approximately 185k score per day. This equates the earnings of 3083 roids per tick so far. Mind you, he's not going to start averaging (much) higher than that. Unlike any value player who wanted to mine that many roids, he hasn't needed a dedicated bitch* to make sure he earns that. He's earned it on his own and together with whoever he attacks with. That's teamwork, unlike your sham** teams.

* DC.

** Not implying anyone in this discussion isn't a team player. But most alliances are 5-15 team players and a bunch of lazy bums putting no more 'effort' into the game than the 'inactive' XP players.

[Treveler]

What it comes down to really is that value players want to play what PA used to be and xp players want to play a whole different game. The problem for xp players is that they can’t live without value players while value players can survive perfectly without xp players. Come to think of it, xp players are much like parasites!

From this discussion its is obvious for me that you cant combine the two successfully as I’m not willing to play a game were an inactive 3-fleet attacker has equal, or in this case a bigger chance to do well then a value player.

What I’m looking for is a short comment from the pa team were they state if they want to continue down the xp path or return to a more value friendly gameplay. I`m not holding my breath though...

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Banned

Unlike any value player who wanted to mine that many roids, he hasn't needed a dedicated bitch* to make sure he earns that.

Ah, but you forget the scanners mon ami. Without them it is all for nought.

[Banned]

Originally Posted by Treveler

What it comes down to really is that value players want to play what PA used to be and xp players want to play a whole different game. The problem for xp players is that they can’t live without value players while value players can survive perfectly without xp players. Come to think of it, xp players are much like parasites!

If everyone was an XP player, they'd never lose ships when attacking, therefore their value would grow. Therefore everyone would be 3-fleeting value players with good(?) XP. And, I think, from there value play would evolve.

From this discussion its is obvious for me that you cant combine the two successfully as I’m not willing to play a game were an inactive 3-fleet attacker has equal, or in this case a bigger chance to do well then a value player.

I'm afriad I don't see what's wrong with that.

What I’m looking for is a short comment from the pa team were they state if they want to continue down the xp path or return to a more value friendly gameplay. I`m not holding my breath though...

In my opinion it's wildly preemptive for PAteam to state anything of the sort. PAteam should view this as an opportunity to see what paths are opened by XP, but they should in no way commit to one style or another before they see the complete picture*. Unfortunately, I'm not sure PAteam are aware of the differences**, seeing as it's been ages since they've played and none of them have played for XP (afaik).

I'm also annoyed that you seem to think that the problem is XP. XP whoring is so viable this round for a plethora of reasons, only one of which is the XP itself. Putting on my value player hat for a moment, I don't think there is a problem with a value player gaining XP from value attacks. These are attacks based on how soon the roids will pay back and so on, largely discounting XP.

Things that make XP whoring possible include the fisher price combat engine, the size of alliances this round and the fact that so many value players aren't 'taking it seriously'*** because it's a free round, along with a whole series of other things.

* As if PAteam will ever.

** Less raw dedication, more cleverness = Good.

*** Read: Defending.

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

Ah, but you forget the scanners mon ami. Without them it is all for nought.

Scanners don't need to run 8 hour MO shifts from 3am to 11am to be worthwhile.

[bwtmc]

Originally Posted by cypher

value players don't have that many roids really.. only a few.. and even they don't get even close to the gains an XP player makes, which means it's never gonna work.. not to mention value players will run out of targets while xp players can easily get steady roids day in day out and never run out of targets

In round 14 I grew 700k in value a day towards the end.

Also, Zikonian's always been pretty good for doubling your score in the last week if you can be bothered. It's not all bad for the 'value players.'

[Benneh]

yeah i agree xp isnt all bad, but tbfh its getting sooo boring.

yay im up to 500 roids. Oh look 5 waves of 200k value terrans with whatever.
Oh look there goes my roids.

Repeat daily.

Its
Just
Getting
Old

:/

[Fyodor]

Originally Posted by Nadar

Never run out of targets? Mate, try understand: XPwh0res got small fleets at their disposal. They need to find a target which has a loophole that suits their fleet + their targets has to be around 2x their value for max XP. Just because an XPwh0re can attack most planets doesn't mean they can actually land and gain roids from every planet.

Look at this guy: xxxx of xxxx Ter 120 97,000 2,200,000 (numbers have been rounded). His fleet consists of about 60 barghests, you're telling me he is gonna run out of targets before the round ends? I highly doubt it.

Right now he is a little off the top 100. Does he deserve congrats if he scores a top 100 slot? This game is supposed to be about roids/ships and war. Not prospering for attacking tiny planets.

XP was introduced to lead people away from noob bashing. It hasnt stopped noob bashing at all, and has actually caused xp whores to focus on noobs/smaller planets.

Taking the planet above, his score is 22 times his value. Thats what you want PA to turn into? To be honest, this disgusts me.

[Troll]

This conversation about XP has caught my interest. I’ve always considered XP to be the reward for how you use your ships to take on a superior valued target. It is clear that certain people have found a way to exploit this by having no value but there small roiding fleet which allows them to hit a wide variety of targets, namely inexperienced players with large gaps in there fleet allowing a small precise hit by a certain class of ship to net large amounts of XP. The problem here is not abuse by players of the XP system per say, but rather the stats that have created a rock paper scissors form of game play. So one has to be toned down either XP needs to have a smaller effect on score or the stats need to contain less ready made holes in the races.

I am inclined to believe that the stats in the game need serious rethinking. Score for skill is by far better than a value for score based system. I base this on the merit that it allows people to keep a large amount of there score after landing a bad attack or being fleet caught. Yes an event like that will and can hinder a planets long term success, but since the planets score is not eradicated there is a good chance that the time to rebuild the fleet will be seen less as an overbearing burden and a waste of time. Now more than ever people can be knocked down but not out of the game. This is a good thing.

So the question that needs to be discussed is “how do u make it so that there are not automatic holes in the races fleets?” I don’t know that answer to this question. Perhaps more ships is a good path, or going back to primary and secondary targeting with secondary targeting having 50% less effect than primary.

I am a founder of DLR and many people, I think, mistakenly think that DLR is full of XP whores. This is not the case at all. DLR contains for the most part a bunch of skilled players in the specific area of attacking. We’ve never been overly keen on defense, yet we do defend in galaxy and receive defense in return. Why do this? Simple, we don’t like losing asteroids anymore than the next guy. We don’t like losing ships either. We like attacking and building large attack fleets and attacking large planets. It’s a go big or go home attitude that infects everyone that comes in contact with DLR. We all have good value and we all have decent incomes. It is my hope that the previous posts stating that the XP whores will start to fall off in score compared to the players that have value and score. I think in the long run balance is the key and if it is proven to be the case then perhaps we can go another round with slightly better stats and keep XP as it is.

DLR is striving for balance. We’re half way through the round now comes the real test, XP vs Value vs Balance. Then as a community I think we can have a real discussion instead of some of these posts of “THE SKY IS FALLING”

Personally I think some people are bitter that they have spent years creating contacts to get into top alliances where they can roid anyone and get defense anytime only to find that the game is changing and all there hard work to get in a position that is favorable to them is coming to a close. We call those people Dinosaurs, anyone remember what happened to them? Go look at the local museum and there u will find “Cyphersaurs Rex” and other old players hanging on to a time where a pa mail threat would send a shiver down the spine of your attacker.

Troll
To the victor goes the XP

[Fyodor]

Originally Posted by Troll

Personally I think some people are bitter that they have spent years creating contacts to get into top alliances where they can roid anyone and get defense anytime only to find that the game is changing and all there hard work to get in a position that is favorable to them is coming to a close. We call those people Dinosaurs, anyone remember what happened to them? Go look at the local museum and there u will find “Cyphersaurs Rex” and other old players hanging on to a time where a pa mail threat would send a shiver down the spine of your attacker.

Most of your post was excellent and youve hit the nail on the head. I was 2 seconds away from hitting the green blob button. Then I saw this last bit.

First being in a top alliance does not come close to gaurenteeing hitting anyone. In fact due to the politcal nature of alliances, you have alot less targets than if you were solo.

The game has always been about roiding and killing fleets. Yeah the game is changing with this xp nonsense, but riddle me this? If the game was recontructed so that the universe was nothing but xp whores, would anyone play? It doesnt sound like a fun time to me.

If you lose the dinosaurs in this game, you are left with nothing. The dinosaurs have kept it alive and since there arent many new players joining, the dinosaurs are the ones who will continue to keep the game alive.

[Troll]

I don't think XP whoring is the way to go, I think balance is.

With balance u have people who can XP whore but won't end in the top 10 in the end. Instead those spots will be for people that recieve defense and play a full game rather than a one trick pony.

Oh and yes perhaps I should of said attack and keep roids with out reprisal rather than anyone they want. That was the round 3 me comming out. Perhaps I am bitter about the mails from Legion threatening me when i got past there defences lol

Touche

[TheBerk]

Has no-one got an alliance to whinge about this round? XP is a viable tactic in this game, it has been for a few rounds, this round however, it has taken off in a big way. GOOD. If I can roid someone with twice my value and roids, and actually survive, then give me that damned xp. It is the fault of my target for not ensuring the correct defence, or not covering the inc themselves, the same as I have done for rounds.
Please, for the love of me, go back to AD, the lot of you, and find an alliance to accuse of cheating / fencesitting / not being your alliance to flame.

[Fyodor]

Originally Posted by TheBerk

Has no-one got an alliance to whinge about this round? XP is a viable tactic in this game, it has been for a few rounds, this round however, it has taken off in a big way. GOOD. If I can roid someone with twice my value and roids, and actually survive, then give me that damned xp. It is the fault of my target for not ensuring the correct defence, or not covering the inc themselves, the same as I have done for rounds.
Please, for the love of me, go back to AD, the lot of you, and find an alliance to accuse of cheating / fencesitting / not being your alliance to flame.

The point gains, when you have a decent value, by attacking larger planets is well deserved. Keeping your value under 100-200k all round and hitting 200-400k values consistantly is ridiculous.

[Nadar]

Originally Posted by Fyodor

XP was introduced to lead people away from noob bashing.

And making it possible for people to continue playing when they've been bashed to death. Can you blame the XPwh0res for wanting to play an alternate way so they don't have to be "stickied" to an alliance and all the other seriousness about PA? No, you can't.

And about that Terran planet of yours. That's the funniest thing I've seen actually. 22 times his value and only 60 Barghest. WHAT CAN HE POSSIBLE GAIN WITH 60 BARGHEST? Even if it was only 60 Ziz he couldn't do much. Yes, he can attack lots of people, but the scoregain is small and he'll never keep up with valuewh0res.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Fyodor

The point gains, when you have a decent value, by attacking larger planets is well deserved. Keeping your value under 100-200k all round and hitting 200-400k values consistantly is ridiculous.

Most xp whores doing well are sitting on at least 300k value. Bar that one guy I don't see anyone sub-200k.

[Fyodor]

Look, I can agree there are positives of XP. Im not saying xp should be erradicated completely, im saying it should be modified dramatically.

Originally Posted by nadar

And making it possible for people to continue playing when they've been bashed to death.

I think Troll has a good idea here:

Score for skill is by far better than a value for score based system. I base this on the merit that it allows people to keep a large amount of there score after landing a bad attack or being fleet caught.

Originally Posted by nadar

Can you blame the XPwh0res for wanting to play an alternate way so they don't have to be "stickied" to an alliance and all the other seriousness about PA? No, you can't.

Unfortunately, like in alot of other aspects of the game there are those who take full adavantage of "loop holes" I dont think keeping you value under 100k all round and attacking 200k value planets is a legit style of play.

I do believe that the 500k value who hits the 1million value planet or the million value who hits the 2 million deserve the xp score.

I retired from alliances 3 rounds ago and play half assed now a days but still have decent showings in the end. So imo it is possible to be allianceless, have fun and have a strong round without playing soley for xp like so many this round are doing.

[Fyodor]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

Most xp whores doing well are sitting on at least 300k value. Bar that one guy I don't see anyone sub-200k.

Noted. I was reading through the forums and scanning through galaxies for target at the same time and he fit what I was thinking 100%

The problem is, it is still possible to do what he is doing. I also think towards rounds end, we are going to see alot more planets in the top 250 who have his type of stats.

[Nadar]

Originally Posted by Fyodor

Unfortunately, like in alot of other aspects of the game there are those who take full adavantage of "loops holes" I dont think keeping you value under 100k all round and attacking 200k value planets is a legit style of play.

There is no loop hole. People could have XP'ed like this like they wanted since XP came since many rounds ago.

Originally Posted by Fyodor

I do believe that the 500k value who hits the 1million value planet deserves the xp score.

Most people XP'ing for real has a value around 400-500k.

Originally Posted by Fyodor

I retired from alliances 3 rounds ago and play half assed now a days but still have decent showings in the end. So imo it is possible to be allianceless, have fun and have a strong round without playing soley for xp like so many this round are doing.

There's about as many definitions of fun as there are players in this game.

[Fyodor]

Originally Posted by Nadar

Most people XP'ing for real has a value around 400-500k.

Im trying to put in into context and I guess I have to think of a value/score ratio that i feel comfortable with. I dont think a planet with a score 10 times their value is favorable to the game. Maybe it is and im wrong. Only time and the community will tell

Originally Posted by Nadar

There's about as many definitions of fun as there are players in this game.

Planetarion has always been a game based on roiding/killing ships etc. While xp does enhance smart ship play, it can and is being abused. Sure its fun for the xp player to do well with their strategy but the 2 halves of the game need to be better balanced. Maybe it will balance itself out by the end. At this point, i dont believe it will.

[Nadar]

If it's getting abused I suggest you report the suspected planets.

[Fyodor]

Originally Posted by Nadar

If it's getting abused I suggest you report the suspected planets.

Its all fair play. I dont speak of abuse in terms of they are breaking the eula, I speak of it as in going against the principles that PA was founded on.

Taken from the PA home page

Beware of having too many asteroids and too few ships, space is cold, and even your own brother can turn against you in the battle that is Planetarion........

Should we now change this to beware of having to high of a value and being zikonian without having stolen any ships that can stop the guy with half your value, but 3 times your scores' 30 strong cruiser attack?

For instance, I hover around 200-400 roids, yet get low valued, high scored income nightly. Im not complaining as I usually replenish my roids. But I still think the game moving away from its original concept is something that I wouldnt want to continue playing in the future.

This round people are seeing the great benefit of xp whoring, so next round, there may be even more people doing it. Can PA survive...say 50 to 75% of the uni xp whoring?

And let me fantasize for a moment and say 50 out of the top 100 planets near the end of the round are xp whores. Theyll be pretty much untouchable due to their low value. This not only effects indivuduals trying to take out a planet in front of them, but could effect alliances not being able to hit to many of the alliance in front of them...

[Wishmaster]

I got nothing against xp, and I dont think an xp hoe will win.

The problem is - people get annoyed when people attack them, and they cant retall..its in human nature to want to do revenge
Also - people get annoyed when alliance cant provide with def - bcause its fking hard to def vs a specialiced terran xp hoe fleet. and when there r so many of them, there isnt much to do. This will lead to people leaving alliances - and start 3 fleeting, and while doing so removing themselves from the community - and quit PA after a while.

90% of the active community play pa bcause of the community, if we c alliances collapsing bcause no one wanna be in alliance / if in alliance just xp hoe - and unable to send def, I think PA is dead.

Its the alliances keepping PA alive and securing the same 2k ish sign ups each round. XP hoeing might be fun and all for a round and 2 - but u will get tired eventually, and quit.

This is what worries me

Also - maybe make a roof of what value u can attack. so that a 100k planet cant attack a 2mio. or - remove xp given if attacking too big planets, lets call it a suicide / abuse penalty for attacking someone 10 times ur value..I dunno.

[Treveler]

Originally Posted by Banned

If everyone was an XP player, they'd never lose ships when attacking, therefore their value would grow. Therefore everyone would be 3-fleeting value players with good(?) XP. And, I think, from there value play would evolve.

Yes but there is no room for the traditional value player in such a universe. PA would be a completely different game were alliances and gals are pointless and the only cooperation you have are in small attack groups. I want to play PA though, not this other game.

I'm afriad I don't see what's wrong with that.

I`m sure you dont.

In my opinion it's wildly preemptive for PAteam to state anything of the sort. PAteam should view this as an opportunity to see what paths are opened by XP, but they should in no way commit to one style or another before they see the complete picture*. Unfortunately, I'm not sure PAteam are aware of the differences**, seeing as it's been ages since they've played and none of them have played for XP (afaik).

I dont see the problem really. Its two completely different games. Either they want to continue with PA or they want to use the name of Planetarion to create a whole different game.

I'm also annoyed that you seem to think that the problem is XP. XP whoring is so viable this round for a plethora of reasons, only one of which is the XP itself. Putting on my value player hat for a moment, I don't think there is a problem with a value player gaining XP from value attacks. These are attacks based on how soon the roids will pay back and so on, largely discounting XP.

XP is the root of the problem. Lessen the effect of xp and the problem would be gone for good.

[lokken]

Although jesterina will disagree with me and talk about long term effects of the round, I think the problem as such is that terrans have too much armor which is ideal for XP'ing. The point i'd make is that by the time initiative > armour, they'll be too far ahead to care, much like a large number of cathaars in round 14, who only needed to play well for the first 50-60% of the round to secure a top 100 position.

I actually don't think XP is the real problem, because everyone can get XP - I am playing for XP with someone else than terran (as I thought terran was too obvious), and doing pretty well considering, but it's exceptionally tougher. That suggests to me it's something that could be fixed in future by a minor tweak in stats, rather than any kind of removal or alteration of the XP feature that has served us so well.

Obviously, until the end of the round, we won't know who is right.

[Banned]

Originally Posted by lokken

Although jesterina will disagree with me and talk about long term effects of the round, I think the problem as such is that terrans have too much armor which is ideal for XP'ing. The point i'd make is that by the time initiative > armour, they'll be too far ahead to care, much like a large number of cathaars in round 14, who only needed to play well for the first 50-60% of the round to secure a top 100 position.

I agree, that factors into the equation. It doesn't exactly help that Zik can't build non-stealers against the two either. But trying to single out one reason that XP whores are doing so well this round is impossible. You can fall back on the simplistic argument that XP is the problem, but that's a difference of premise, because in my opinion, XP is the solution.

[Nadar]

Originally Posted by Fyodor

But I still think the game moving away from its original concept is something that I wouldnt want to continue playing in the future.

What original concept? Pre-round 6 or pre-round 10?

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Banned

I agree, that factors into the equation. It doesn't exactly help that Zik can't build non-stealers against the two either. But trying to single out one reason that XP whores are doing so well this round is impossible. You can fall back on the simplistic argument that XP is the problem, but that's a difference of premise, because in my opinion, XP is the solution.

Well i think it is the major factor.

The other one would be that a lot of people are playing the XP way, so it's a much more even split between value/xp now. The current style of play combined with the stats is contributing to a game where playing for xp is very, very, profitable.

The difference between the two factors, is that unlike playing styles, you can do something about stats (but not mid round).

[bwtmc]

If XP's to thank for a few new names in the t100 list, i'm actually happy! The same people get in every round, it's incredibly dull.

Anyway! Have no fear, PAN will solve everything for everyone.

[ComradeRob]

Originally Posted by Wishmaster

I got nothing against xp, and I dont think an xp hoe will win.

The problem is - people get annoyed when people attack them, and they cant retall..its in human nature to want to do revenge

I can't think of many occasions on which I've bothered to retaliate against my attackers - I can normally find a better target which is more useful to me.

Originally Posted by Wishmaster

Also - people get annoyed when alliance cant provide with def - bcause its fking hard to def vs a specialiced terran xp hoe fleet. and when there r so many of them, there isnt much to do.

The fact that specialised fleets are hard to defend against is nothing new. Attack fleets are supposed to be hard to defend against.

Originally Posted by Wishmaster

This will lead to people leaving alliances - and start 3 fleeting, and while doing so removing themselves from the community - and quit PA after a while.

90% of the active community play pa bcause of the community, if we c alliances collapsing bcause no one wanna be in alliance / if in alliance just xp hoe - and unable to send def, I think PA is dead.

This round, no alliances have collapsed or disbanded. This is better than most previous rounds, in fact.

Originally Posted by Wishmaster

Its the alliances keepping PA alive and securing the same 2k ish sign ups each round. XP hoeing might be fun and all for a round and 2 - but u will get tired eventually, and quit.

This is what worries me

This is why the game needs more new and interesting features that enable greater cooperation. Surely it can't be impossible to find a way of having a community without requiring people to be awake at 4am running defence?

Originally Posted by Wishmaster

Also - maybe make a roof of what value u can attack. so that a 100k planet cant attack a 2mio. or - remove xp given if attacking too big planets, lets call it a suicide / abuse penalty for attacking someone 10 times ur value..I dunno.

The XP cap already does this. You don't get more XP for attacking a planet 3x your value than you do for attacking a planet 2x your value. If a planet 10x my value is dumb enough to get roided by me, that's his problem and not mine. I certainly don't think players should be encouraged to hit smaller targets.

[bwtmc]

DOS died, but I guess that didn't live for very long either - Planetarion without block wars is more constructive, if a little boring.

[x-dANGEr]

I think a good idea to solve the problem is to change the formula. Maybe, making a formula which rewards killing enemy ships and roiding with XP would reduce the problem. As this way, a fleet catch for highly valued players would do them as good as a well-done roiding process for smaller planets. Also, the casualities you do to the attacking suiciding XP player's fleet will grant you as a defender XP, and maybe more than what he'll get.

Another idea is to remove the bash limit to attack a planet that has a hostile fleet coming to you. Like, I get attacked by a 100k value player, as long as his fleet is moving towards me, I can attack him too, so, I can plan a nice fleet catch and destroy his fleet.

[Tomkat]

Originally Posted by Tweaker

yeah i agree xp isnt all bad, but tbfh its getting sooo boring.

yay im up to 500 roids. Oh look 5 waves of 200k value terrans with whatever.
Oh look there goes my roids.

Repeat daily.

:/

Well then doesn't that tell you something?

If they're only 200k then obviously their fleet is pretty small.

Haven't you cottoned on that if you build a decent number of anti-BS and anti-DE then they simply won't be able to hit you?




The XP players are finding it more and more difficult to find easy targets, than from the beginning of the round. People's fleets are becoming more balanced and so it isn't easy to find targets with no anti-DE/BS or whatever.




I also don't see why XP is seen as a "bad" thing, just because some people haven't used it and so are falling behind.

If I was a new player to the game, I wouldn't want to be poring over stats. I wouldn't want to be trying to find an alliance and getting up at 3am then 6am then 9am to check my fleets.

I'd want to launch 3 fleets off attacking, then check the landings. I'd want to get lots of nice score for hitting big people.

The reason people get fed up with the game is simply because they're small and will stay small for the foreseeable future of the round. XP gives them a chance.

Stop living in the past.



AND STOP ****ING MOANING ABOUT XP. JUST BECAUSE YOU DIDNT HAVE THE FORESIGHT TO SEE YOU COULD GET DECENT SCORE GAINS FROM IT, WHEN OTHERS DID, DOESN'T MEAN IT'S "BAD" OR "WRONG".

thanks!

[Wishmaster]

Originally Posted by ComradeRob

I can't think of many occasions on which I've bothered to retaliate against my attackers - I can normally find a better target which is more useful to me.

I dont retall my attacks often either, but I remember back in r1-2-3 where I got my m8s together to kill of the twat that roided me. I m guessing new players still think like this, atleast I ve heard whining fromnew players: WTF - he can attack me..and I cant attack him?!

Originally Posted by ComradeRob

The fact that specialised fleets are hard to defend against is nothing new. Attack fleets are supposed to be hard to defend against.

ofc - but people talk about loopholes in a persons fleet. Its close to impossible for zik to stop BS incs. It requires no skill to find target - too much armour - which has been said b4 is great for the xp hoes.

Originally Posted by ComradeRob

This round, no alliances have collapsed or disbanded. This is better than most previous rounds, in fact.

People leaving alliances because of no def - they c its useless with alliance - new people dont join. In the long run alliances will fail.

Originally Posted by ComradeRob

This is why the game needs more new and interesting features that enable greater cooperation. Surely it can't be impossible to find a way of having a community without requiring people to be awake at 4am running defence?

That will make a new game - one which I think many dont want. I for one want activity and dedication to be an important factor in pa. I dont wanna logon midday and send 3 attack fleets on someone 10 times bigger than me - and get tons of xp.

Originally Posted by ComradeRob

The XP cap already does this. You don't get more XP for attacking a planet 3x your value than you do for attacking a planet 2x your value. If a planet 10x my value is dumb enough to get roided by me, that's his problem and not mine. I certainly don't think players should be encouraged to hit smaller targets.

I m fully aware of the xp cap - and its not about being dumb with current stats, its about being unable to def. For those in top alliances / good BPs / gals it is ofc doable to def, but for the majority they just give up, and get annoyed.

I have not lost many roids this round, but I know of people which have quitted already because of roid losses, and because they cba to c same fleets going at them, and they being unable to do anything about it.

[Treveler]

Originally Posted by Tomkat

AND STOP ****ING MOANING ABOUT XP. JUST BECAUSE YOU DIDNT HAVE THE FORESIGHT TO SEE YOU COULD GET DECENT SCORE GAINS FROM IT, WHEN OTHERS DID, DOESN'T MEAN IT'S "BAD" OR "WRONG".

thanks!

It is both BAD and WRONG if you want to play PA. If you want to play that other game - that xp game, its very nice of course. I want to play PA though and argue thereafter.

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by Treveler

It is both BAD and WRONG if you want to play PA. If you want to play that other game - that xp game, its very nice of course. I want to play PA though and argue thereafter.

I don't know how you define Planetarion - but considering the XP concept was added to the Planetarion gameplay it cannot be bad nor wrong at all if you want to play PA. It is part of the game nowadays.

Personally I totally dislike the arguments of most people. The game is since pax shifting away from the "uber-activity is the key to success" thing and over to a more skill-rewarding gameplay, where activity is less important. Yes the game is probably too attack-oriented nowadays, but as Troll already pointed out it is a matter of balance, not a matter of what is good and bad in the eyes of the minority of players - players which once lead to killing off the game by making it too demanding with their block wars and staying up all night.

[Benneh]

I have fs, but 150 wyverns and 50 levs cut through alot of de :/

[cypher]

heh people stating it takes skill to find 'loopholes' with these stats amaze me... how thick are you?

at their value size you can ALWAYS find ziks who can't stop BS... heck i'm top 5 value and there are enough terrans that can hit me and roid me even if i prod clippers.. also averaging 3k roids as someone calculated won't be as easy as it looks as once again attacking is too easy.

defence is hard no matter how you put it and why would you really with xp being this easy..

also stats are WAY too easy for xp players. even more then ever.

[lokken]

I actually decided not to play as terran as I thought it was going to be pretty similar to playing cath in r14 (which was pretty boring) and decided i'd prefer to be the hunter.

XP playing with a race other than terran is difficult. Battleships are so overpowered it's not worth anyone's while building enough ships to defend against them because of the sheer cost. This means people focus on defending the other races, so terran get a more or less free ride. Effectively people have given up versus terran, so the XP problem you highlight isn't actually down to XP as a concept at all - it's down to the stats and how people have decided to play as a result of them, along with the more relaxed nature of the round (which i like). Why would a xan build 500 peacekeepers, when he could fit out another roiding fleet and just cap more that way?

People talk about being "unable to defend" when actually they mean "cant defend against terrans". This is a stats problem rather than a game mechanics problem. To lie the blame solely on XP and say we should curtail it is very narrow minded because it helps many players across the food chain. What instead we should ask - why is the game tilted heavily towards playing for XP? The answer to me lies partly in the stats, partly of the approach of some players to the round and partly in the way people have reacted to the stats.

Infact, i'd like you to look at the stats for the races in terms of % playing value and % playing XP after a quick look on sandmans. Obviously this doesn't account for massive fleetlosses or your fleet getting caught, so the benefit of the doubt lies squarely towards players playing for value.

Xandathrii - 5 of the top 10 play for value, 5 play for XP.
Zikonian - 4 of the top 10 play for value, 6 play for XP.
Cathaar - 3 of the top 10 play for value, 7 play for XP.
Terran - 10 of the top 10 play for XP

The big cumbersome races (cat with small efficient fleets and ter with difficult to kill ones) are always going to have a tendency towards XP, wihle Zik and Xandathrii are pretty evenly split, although perhaps they should slightly favour value. With Zikonian's ability to adapt to get terran ships, it's hardly surprising that they have a minor (although not necessary true) tendency to play for XP.

I agree that a big tilt towards XP isn't a good thing, but then you have to get credit for those who used their initiative who picked terran, and for those in the other races who are doing pretty well themselves, playing in whatever way they choose. Races other than terran playing for XP will find it very tough indeed, for example, but they are still getting reasonable results.

[Benneh]

Originally Posted by cypher

heh people stating it takes skill to find 'loopholes' with these stats amaze me... how thick are you?

at their value size you can ALWAYS find ziks who can't stop BS... heck i'm top 5 value and there are enough terrans that can hit me and roid me even if i prod clippers.. also averaging 3k roids as someone calculated won't be as easy as it looks as once again attacking is too easy.

defence is hard no matter how you put it and why would you really with xp being this easy..

also stats are WAY too easy for xp players. even more then ever.

Exactly every terran who hits me with wyverns, dent my clippers. the next wave comes oh look i cap abit more bs but i lose more clippers. Eventully its just not worth stayin.

[Benneh]

Because caths are stingy

[cypher]

because people run? because it's not that hard to cap enough widows to block 100/200 ter BS? heh

[bwtmc]

It's not unheard of, for galmates or alliance players (Xan and Cat included!) to send defence. I had it at least ten times last round \o/

[Benneh]

Originally Posted by bwtmc

It's not unheard of, for galmates or alliance players (Xan and Cat included!) to send defence. I had it at least ten times last round \o/

and you sending def this round?

Thats UNHEARD OF!

[Gate]

Originally Posted by Tweaker

Exactly every terran who hits me with wyverns, dent my clippers. the next wave comes oh look i cap abit more bs but i lose more clippers. Eventully its just not worth stayin.

However, if a zik has dragons and/or wyverns, it seriously dents the probability of me attacking them with BS or DE... so in the long term, staying for a tick and trading ship for ship could work (maybe get a small stockpile so when a terran attacks you with just enough BS, you can spam enough clippers to make it worth it?)

[Benneh]

Originally Posted by Gate

However, if a zik has dragons and/or wyverns, it seriously dents the probability of me attacking them with BS or DE... so in the long term, staying for a tick and trading ship for ship could work (maybe get a small stockpile so when a terran attacks you with just enough BS, you can spam enough clippers to make it worth it?)

hehe yeaah it is kinda. depends what they send, most terrans who hit me are wyvern+levs and dont even give me a chance to cap drags. (altho one did and gave me 50 odd)

Im not to bothered about it, im just quite happy i have enough bs now to use my own bs fleet <3

[Shiprex]

Originally Posted by lokken

The greatness of XP is that you can get reduced to nothing, yet still have something to play for.

You can play for value and be very successful

or play for XP and be very successful

I've lost my fleet 3 times this round - previous to the days of XP, or by even reducing XP, there would be far less incentive to play. XP presents a true test of target selection, being able to pick holes in people's fleet, working out if they will get defence, how the defender will think, not to mention relying on the big task of fleet preservation (as losing your fleet = less XP for a while).

Playing for XP is a skill, just as much as playing for value and trying to outmuscle your opposition.

100% with those who think XP is a good thing. Think of the imbalance in effect an attack by a CAT fleet can have on a defender. Nothing at all and they can keep their value score.

Surely this is a fairer way to play the game?

[lokken]

i've heard that defence is a word meaning wooden barrier removal.

[Squidly]

Originally Posted by lokken

i've heard that defence is a word meaning wooden barrier removal.

Really? But... wait, that must mean that attack is simply a pointy thing you use to hold up paper on a bulletin board

[Seed of Chaos]

Originally Posted by Treveler

I wonder how many who went for a pure xp strategy ie. attacking not (just) for roids but for xp alone. I think there is a lot less than for the conventional stragegy and imo that imply that the xp strategy is to "powerfull" in the absense of a better word (so far).

A better word might be "powerful" as that word actually exists

[isildurx]

My biggest problem at the moment is that zik steals after pods cap roids. So at the moment i get spammed by mass Ziz incs(around 50 a time) which i steal after they nick all my roids. Mildly annoying :P