|
22 Jul 2014, 20:41
|
#1
|
PA Team
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,449
|
What about if we had a "hirr" round...
...where you are ranked by the amount of score (ships) which you have lost in combat.
I'd not do it as a serious round, but more of a speedgame. The idea is that you would have to get roids to grow and gain value, but also be able to lose that value constantly.
I guess at the end some sort of agreement where people amazingly suicide on each other in the final ticks would occur, but in some ways it seems harder than playing an actual round.
Just a very random thought for the day?
__________________
r8-10 RaH r10.5-12 MISTU
|
|
|
22 Jul 2014, 20:44
|
#2
|
a bucket
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chatham, UK
Posts: 1,073
|
Re: What about if we had a "hirr" round...
Ziks would have an amazing advantage since they lose ships when winning as well as when losing in combat!
__________________
Proud to have been TGV!
aargh! died in Jenova! | idled in ROCK | disappointed in Audentes | been Roguish | p-p-previously a p-p-p3nguin
Ascendancy
Otterly an Otter.
|
|
|
22 Jul 2014, 20:46
|
#3
|
PA Team
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,449
|
Re: What about if we had a "hirr" round...
Ah true, we'd have to take that into consideration I guess and offset it by stolen value
__________________
r8-10 RaH r10.5-12 MISTU
|
|
|
23 Jul 2014, 08:39
|
#4
|
Paso Leaute
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 919
|
Re: What about if we had a "hirr" round...
It might be fun but...
This would essentially render defence useless. Defence is usually about deterrence; that the cost of the landing is so high that people won't land. Very rarely are people actually covered in the sense of the defence stopping all capping. If the attacker gains from losing his ships deterrence is worthless. Furthermore if the defenders have an interest in losing their ships then they may not actually want to cover people properly anyway, because if properly covered there isn't any big battle.
Of course if you want to lose a lot of ships you have to have them so people will still have to protect their value in some way, so there may still be some deterrence so i'm not sure how things would work out; but one thing is certain the psychology of defence will be radically altered.
__________________
An optimist may see a light where there is none, but why must the pessimist always run to blow it out?
|
|
|
23 Jul 2014, 11:11
|
#5
|
Internal Error
Join Date: May 2002
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 696
|
Re: What about if we had a "hirr" round...
I have to disagree there. It might be worth sending defence. If you send the right ships to defend, you may end up:
-losing the ships and increasing your score
-gaining salvage and thus the ability to rebuild (and then get them killed again later for score)
-prevent attacker from gaining roids (maybe?)
-(might be able to) prevent the attacker from losing ships (and thus gaining score)
__________________
Nitros
[]LCH[] ..lets change history
|
|
|
23 Jul 2014, 13:55
|
#6
|
Paso Leaute
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 919
|
Re: What about if we had a "hirr" round...
My first post was obviously a bit hasty without thinking things through.
Because you need value in order to have ships to lose you still need to husband your fleet to a certain extent. Therefore People are unlikely to simply crash their fleet for no gain at all, to do so would give you a short term boost for a long term cost. Therefore lands are likely to be similar to xp lands atm but magnified. The attacker can be assumed to land regardless of the cost in ships so long as they still cap.
This being the case it presents a problem for defence which has to either;
A, aim to totally prevent cap, which as pointed out earlier is actually quite rare in the ordinary game because it requires many fleets and is usually unnecessary.
or
B, aim to fight a battle, whereby defenders gain score from their losses plus get salvage.
The problem is that in scenario A, you achieve what is the conventional aim of defence and save the roids but since the attacker will recall if he does not cap at all you lose out on the potential score gain from a battle.
In scenario B, the opposite occurs you fail to protect the roids but do successfully fight a battle and gain score. However in so doing the attacker has achieved his objective by both fighting a battle and securing the roids with which to build more ships.
Therefore either alliance defence aiming for scenario A accepts that it can defend much less because defence needs more ships, and is unattractive because it avoids battles. Or alliance defence is structured to fight battles but in so doing allows the enemy to achieve his objectives.
The alliance DC must therefore chose he either has a costly and unattractive defence model or accepts that he usually allows the attacker to win.
__________________
An optimist may see a light where there is none, but why must the pessimist always run to blow it out?
Last edited by [B5]Londo; 23 Jul 2014 at 14:01.
|
|
|
24 Jul 2014, 09:14
|
#7
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: What about if we had a "hirr" round...
Quote:
Originally Posted by [B5]Londo
(snip)
|
The fact that you were able to write such a long post about it makes me feel like this would actually be amusing to try sometime. A Christmas round, maybe? Slightly more serious than a speeder or havoc, but not on official round.
__________________
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.
|
|
|
24 Jul 2014, 09:28
|
#8
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,038
|
Re: What about if we had a "hirr" round...
this would change the style of play as people would have to be prepared to ship roids off for free rather than defend them and potentially obliterate another fleet, as that would work against them
__________________
Did some stuff, played here n there done just about all there is to do
|
|
|
24 Jul 2014, 10:16
|
#9
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: What about if we had a "hirr" round...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_Esper
this would change the style of play as people would have to be prepared to ship roids off for free rather than defend them and potentially obliterate another fleet, as that would work against them
|
Isn't that the whole idea? :P
__________________
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.
|
|
|
24 Jul 2014, 14:50
|
#10
|
Retired
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Back Porch Bar
Posts: 2,593
|
Re: What about if we had a "hirr" round...
I'm so good at crashing I would win!
__________________
I'd rather be fishing.
Utterly useless since r3
|
|
|
24 Jul 2014, 20:13
|
#11
|
PA Ancient
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Ventnor, Isle Of Wight
Posts: 1,060
|
Re: What about if we had a "hirr" round...
FINALLY.. a round I could actually win
__________________
Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56
Ever been attacked by a p3nguin? You get left a bit black and white!
p3nguin Founder
|
|
|
25 Jul 2014, 09:38
|
#12
|
KK
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 662
|
Re: What about if we had a "hirr" round...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin
FINALLY.. a round I could actually win
|
Pull the other one...
|
|
|
26 Jul 2014, 14:35
|
#13
|
idle
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 968
|
Re: What about if we had a "hirr" round...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin
FINALLY.. a round I could actually win
|
i dont think so
as it is you need to GAIN value before Crashing it
so sorry assman, no chance :/
__________________
m0rph3us formerly known as Bugz
"It´s not about how hard u hit, its about how hard u can get hit and still keep moving forward! How much u can take and still move forward!"
|
|
|
26 Jul 2014, 18:07
|
#14
|
PA Ancient
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Ventnor, Isle Of Wight
Posts: 1,060
|
Re: What about if we had a "hirr" round...
... even members of my alliance abuse me! lol
__________________
Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56
Ever been attacked by a p3nguin? You get left a bit black and white!
p3nguin Founder
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:35.
| |