|
|
28 Oct 2013, 21:29
|
#51
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 957
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by Final Changes, they are in Appocomaster's hands now
Changed all Frigate ERes to put them in the 90-125% range for the 3 ships targeting them T2
Changed all Structure Killers to 'suicide' between 720 and 950 value per Construction destroyed.
Changed Viper's initiative to 1
Reduced Beetle's cost (increasing EMP efficiency) by ~5%
Reduced Roach's cost (increasing EMP efficiency) by ~5%
Increased Vsharrak's A/C and D/C (+17)
Increased Bomber's cost by 50%
Increased Xan De's cost by 100%
Switched Defender's targeting
Increased Ranger's cost, increased A/C (+6) and D/C (+16), changed initiative to 4 (now shooting before Phantom as well)
Increased Guardian's guns (+2)
|
|
|
|
28 Oct 2013, 21:52
|
#52
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Wut. Already?
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
29 Oct 2013, 00:47
|
#53
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Why are we having a repeat of r52 & r50 stats?
|
|
|
29 Oct 2013, 06:06
|
#54
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
This is always the best part about SD. "What, the stats are final? Better start complaining about them!"
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
29 Oct 2013, 08:09
|
#55
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 707
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Why are xan so utterly weak as always?
|
|
|
29 Oct 2013, 08:31
|
#56
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
By "always" I assume you mean 18% of the top 100 in r52 and 34% in r53?
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
29 Oct 2013, 08:54
|
#57
|
YAAARRGH!
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Scotland
Posts: 481
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
ooh, snap
|
|
|
29 Oct 2013, 10:01
|
#58
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 707
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
well top rankings are usually based on politics, player dedication and galaxy through the round...
|
|
|
29 Oct 2013, 10:02
|
#59
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 477
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Why does hornet have such ridiculously strong emp resistance?
And beetle and guardian..
Last edited by Plaguuu; 29 Oct 2013 at 11:20.
|
|
|
29 Oct 2013, 10:06
|
#60
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheoDD
well top rankings are usually based on politics, player dedication and galaxy through the round...
|
And not on whether the race you pick is actually good or not? Come on, man.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
29 Oct 2013, 14:09
|
#61
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
These stats have basically be copied from r52 and played around a bit.
|
|
|
29 Oct 2013, 14:33
|
#62
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 157
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
These stats have basically be copied from r52 and played around a bit.
|
I concur, Cath is more efficient, ETD Fr lost a lot of its wow factor with the addition of the defender, which is also zero loss on DE. And etd no longer has a huge gap to being attacked by CO. Their BS is still pretty good.
__________________
BOOM
|
|
|
29 Oct 2013, 14:56
|
#63
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
I'm liking some of the changes made Pat
__________________
Missing Subh (r15-r18)
|
|
|
29 Oct 2013, 19:43
|
#64
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 957
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plaguuu
Why does hornet have such ridiculously strong emp resistance?
And beetle and guardian..
|
The Beetle has high ERes so that they still fire after the Spider freezes them, making Spider+Xan Fi not too strong vs Co.
The Guardian had a similar interaction with the Widow, but I opted to switch that around, so now the Guardian fires first and the Widow has a high ERes so it is only partially affected. The Guardian's high ERes honestly doesn't mean a thing since it fires either sooner or simultaneously. The only way it comes into play is when you flak for Cr with the Guardian only without a single other Bs present.
The Hornet however I must have mistaken for the Scorpion when I changed it - this is obviously an oversight, thanks for catching that. I apologize for not catching it earlier, but that's the advantage of starting on stats early!
As for this being a repeat of r50/52 - I chose these because round 52 was one of the most balanced and (in my opinion) one of the more offensive ones in recent history. I think I have changed/added enough to not make it feel like a repeat.
|
|
|
30 Oct 2013, 13:29
|
#65
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,038
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
so sick of these attacking stats, can't we have full MT where i only need to build 3 ships
__________________
Did some stuff, played here n there done just about all there is to do
|
|
|
30 Oct 2013, 14:24
|
#66
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
As far as I'm concerned, the age of defensive stats is over. Round 51 proved conclusively that it's a bad idea in PA as it is now. (But then again, since I'm not actually the big bad stats boss, who knows!)
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
30 Oct 2013, 17:30
|
#67
|
Planetarion Forum Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,289
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
I agree with Mzyxptlk, attacking stats are far better for the game than defensive stats. Even though for certain def whores defensive stats are more fun. 3 cheers for offensive stats!
__________________
Romans 10:9-10
#strategy
|
|
|
30 Oct 2013, 18:56
|
#68
|
Valle is my hero
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,581
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
But... These stats aren't offensive anymore... In fact they are horribly defensive now
|
|
|
30 Oct 2013, 19:04
|
#69
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 157
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaiba
but... These stats aren't offensive anymore... In fact they are horribly defensive now
|
like!
__________________
BOOM
|
|
|
1 Nov 2013, 00:21
|
#70
|
Wizard
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Great White North eh!
Posts: 102
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrikc
(tentative) update:
Targeting efficiencies have been changed to 100%/50%/25% (from 100%/60%/30%)
Structure killers now die upon use - cost per structure blown up is to be determined. Currently thinking of around 1k value in SKs per Construction.
|
THEN SK's better be a hell of a lot cheaper next round they are way to costly to have them die.
__________________
I got roids......but I'm not going to share them with you!!
|
|
|
1 Nov 2013, 03:15
|
#71
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 957
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlin
THEN SK's better be a hell of a lot cheaper next round they are way to costly to have them die.
|
Currently it takes ~22 Termites (the least efficient SK) at a cost of 92400 resources to kill one Construction. Finance Centres increase cost by 4500 per previous FC already owned, meaning that the 21st FC and onwards costs more than it would cost to destroy one, something most planets have by around tick 200.
The last 6 Finance Centres cost a huge amount to (re)build, for a total of 1566000 resources, whereas 137 Termites needed to kill them cost 575400 resources. This is excluding the value the target will not be gaining, or any other effect destroying his amps/factories/etc might have.
I don't think they're too expensive at all. Yes, you're sacrificing value to destroy someone else's - this is a war game, for Pete's sake!
|
|
|
1 Nov 2013, 10:45
|
#72
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 477
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrikc
Currently it takes ~22 Termites (the least efficient SK) at a cost of 92400 resources to kill one Construction. Finance Centres increase cost by 4500 per previous FC already owned, meaning that the 21st FC and onwards costs more than it would cost to destroy one, something most planets have by around tick 200.
The last 6 Finance Centres cost a huge amount to (re)build, for a total of 1566000 resources, whereas 137 Termites needed to kill them cost 575400 resources. This is excluding the value the target will not be gaining, or any other effect destroying his amps/factories/etc might have.
I don't think they're too expensive at all. Yes, you're sacrificing value to destroy someone else's - this is a war game, for Pete's sake!
|
I dont think it matteres if you think they are expensive or not. Before you didnt lose value when you used them, still almost noone bothered. Now even less will use em
|
|
|
1 Nov 2013, 18:25
|
#73
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
I'm waiting for the ship stats and other game features like governments to be finalised so I can do new player guide / tick plans etc.
Any ideas to when it could be done by?
__________________
Missing Subh (r15-r18)
|
|
|
1 Nov 2013, 20:29
|
#74
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Noruega
Posts: 2,999
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
I think interceptor should be co class
Either that or the efficiency of the defender should be reduced
__________________
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of War"
|
|
|
1 Nov 2013, 20:50
|
#75
|
Valle is my hero
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,581
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley
I'm waiting for the ship stats and other game features like governments to be finalised so I can do new player guide / tick plans etc.
Any ideas to when it could be done by?
|
Knowing Appocomaster probably Monday and I predict 1 int change, 5 dc/ac changes and a general raising of emp effs
He is like clockwork
|
|
|
1 Nov 2013, 20:57
|
#76
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Noruega
Posts: 2,999
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
<Appocomaster> stats are final
__________________
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of War"
|
|
|
2 Nov 2013, 17:39
|
#77
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
just waiting for these new cov ops to be finalised
__________________
Missing Subh (r15-r18)
|
|
|
8 Nov 2013, 20:17
|
#78
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Noruega
Posts: 2,999
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
30% etd in uni, looks like the stats are really balanced
__________________
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of War"
|
|
|
9 Nov 2013, 02:05
|
#79
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 957
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
A Xan is #1 though so clearly they are overpowered.
|
|
|
9 Nov 2013, 16:36
|
#80
|
☆ ♥
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,489
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrikc
A Xan is #1 though so clearly they are overpowered.
|
lol
__________________
R3: LegioN (came #32) || R4: BlueTuba
R5: WolfPack Order || R6: Wolfpack
R7: Fury
----------retired-------
R52-R55: Apprime
R56-R57: FaceLess
R58-60: Apprime/Ultores
|
|
|
10 Nov 2013, 02:38
|
#81
|
semi-retired
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: oregon
Posts: 69
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrikc
A Xan is #1 though so clearly they are overpowered.
|
Indeed they are, my ter escorts are working wonderfully
|
|
|
10 Dec 2013, 19:44
|
#82
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: In bed with your mum.
Posts: 664
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Who came up with the idea to make it so that fleets only interact with half of the universe? As if the player base hasn't dwindled enough, you then decide to make it so half of those planets are automatically 100% untargetable for you, or useless for defense?
At what point does it appear like an intelligent idea to effectively reduce the player pool of the universe from 500~ active players to half that?
Taking a casual glance at the Uni page, and see that the t100 is 44/100 ETD from 26% planets. Comparitively, Terran has 17 from 24% planets, despite a major fleet flaw to a race with only 12% of planets. Hilariously, over 50% of the top 50 are ETD.
Frankly, I'm not surprised in the slightest that this is the outcome.
Was BETA not run for these stats? Who the hell made them?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
Can people please stop pretending they have no chance of winning at tick 300, you just end up looking retarded later.
|
^^^^ Can you blv that sh*t?
Last edited by [JungleMuffin]; 16 Dec 2013 at 23:42.
|
|
|
14 Dec 2013, 10:05
|
#83
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Noruega
Posts: 2,999
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
It was obvious etd was overpowered, i dont know why nothing was done about it. It was mentioned in this very thread.
__________________
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of War"
|
|
|
14 Dec 2013, 23:14
|
#84
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 957
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by isildurx
It was obvious etd was overpowered, i dont know why nothing was done about it. It was mentioned in this very thread.
|
I see more people saying Etd was weak and unplayable than overpowered, which lead me to increasing the Ranger/Guardian efficiency slightly.
I think the biggest issue with Etd wasn't so much their power, it was their ability to fend off 5 classes early in the round (EMP vs fr/de/cr/bs, Ranger vs Fi), making them harder to roid. All the while they were happily roiding with Fr fakes, giving them a big value/roid lead by the time most other races had Siege hulls completed.
In hindsight I overestimated the strength of Destroyers and should have kept Defenders to shoot Fr only, or Fr/Co changing Interceptor for something else - this change alone would have probably let us see a completely different round.
|
|
|
14 Dec 2013, 23:58
|
#85
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Noruega
Posts: 2,999
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Defenders and Investors were both horribly imba, at least one of 'em should have been nerfed.
__________________
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of War"
|
|
|
15 Dec 2013, 04:34
|
#86
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,038
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
i still can't believe that the eff of defenders were more powerful than guardians bs/cr should always be more powerful than fi/co
__________________
Did some stuff, played here n there done just about all there is to do
|
|
|
15 Dec 2013, 09:29
|
#87
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
That's a very simplistic way of looking at things.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
15 Dec 2013, 10:23
|
#88
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Never re-use if u intend to alter it :/
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
16 Dec 2013, 12:34
|
#89
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 517
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_Esper
i still can't believe that the eff of defenders were more powerful than guardians bs/cr should always be more powerful than fi/co
|
Defenders have init 3 which make their use only effective (against Investor(init 2)) if accompanied of other FI killers as even if you ground your non-EMP BS/CR they will be hugged before having a chance to fire.
__________________
mxy
|
|
|
16 Dec 2013, 14:28
|
#90
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,038
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by fortran
Defenders have init 3 which make their use only effective (against Investor(init 2)) if accompanied of other FI killers as even if you ground your non-EMP BS/CR they will be hugged before having a chance to fire.
|
isn't that the same thing as saying defenders are more useful than guards?
my point that i was trying to make is that defenders EMP better than guards
Stopping 10000 Drake (260k) as t1 requires Defender: 66667 (153.3k) Guardian: 3175 (168.3k)
My opinion is that Bs/Cr should be more effcient vs fr/de than fi/co. not the other way round as was the case with the ships this round
__________________
Did some stuff, played here n there done just about all there is to do
|
|
|
16 Dec 2013, 23:06
|
#91
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 957
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_Esper
My opinion is that Bs/Cr should be more effcient vs fr/de than fi/co. not the other way round as was the case with the ships this round
|
That's oversimplifying a more complex interaction - there are many other variables that could warrant a Fi to have a better efficiency than a Bs. More than anything I think targeting was the issue here, as I said before, Etd went from having too many 'holes' to having too few, mostly due to the Defender.
Funny enough it's almost certain a Zik will win the round, and a Xan still has a good shot at second place, though it doesn't matter too much which race you hand to these particular players.
|
|
|
17 Dec 2013, 00:38
|
#92
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: In bed with your mum.
Posts: 664
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk
That's a very simplistic way of looking at things.
|
He's right though. Obviously allowances need to be made for the +1 Ally/+2 gal def disadvantage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fortran
Defenders have init 3 which make their use only effective (against Investor(init 2)) if accompanied of other FI killers as even if you ground your non-EMP BS/CR they will be hugged before having a chance to fire.
|
Sorry mxy, can't agree with you there. Defenders are 0 loss T1 defense vs all DE. The T2 is a cherry on top, and a pretty decent one at that.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
Can people please stop pretending they have no chance of winning at tick 300, you just end up looking retarded later.
|
^^^^ Can you blv that sh*t?
|
|
|
18 Dec 2013, 01:35
|
#93
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,038
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Also Investors are more effective t2 than t1
__________________
Did some stuff, played here n there done just about all there is to do
|
|
|
20 Dec 2013, 20:44
|
#94
|
Retard0r
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,164
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiba
But... These stats aren't offensive anymore... In fact they are horribly defensive now
|
Yet never before has so many people bled so many roids
__________________
-Chimpie
* We do not exist *
* G-II * NoS * VsN * Ascendancy * Osiris * xVx * Ultores *
|
|
|
21 Dec 2013, 01:11
|
#95
|
Valle is my hero
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,581
|
Re: R54 stat discussion: revised Round 52 stats
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrunkenViking
Yet never before has so many people bled so many roids
|
Poor activity and general apathy does not make a stat set offensive. These stats are still heavily weighed towards the defensive end of things. Just because ETD FR was a bitch to stop and nearly the whole universe chose to go it further shows how horribly done this 'revision of an old set' was and how defensive in nature the rest of the races were. When people cant be bother to play PA properly they go EMP heavy and pick the best roiding fleet, then they dont bother defending all round.
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:40.
| |