Single Targeting

[[B5]Londo]

The disadvantages personally are that because anyone can land on me im getting attacked 24/7 (well it feels like it) every attack I launch gets a retal or 3, i would much rather not land than be forced to live constantly on edge.
Now I recognise most ppl dont take things as seriously as I do, but I think that the vulnerability of the top planets is vastly overstated, yes they lose a tick or 2 occasionally but it in no way compares to the hammering many others get; I dont think the roid gap between the top and middle is any different to usual as a result.

I have to admit that it seems to me the majority quite like single targeting, and indeed if I was DCing i would like this round more than usual, the 0 loss def opportunities are good but as it stands ive recalled from a few centaurs vs my FR two days in a row... it all depends on where you stand

[Wishmaster]

Originally Posted by Patrikc

Compared to Wishmaster's gal last round, every gal has had mass incomings this round.

While Zik this round is strong as well (though not as strong as last round) they're at least roidable by certain fleettypes. Last round people didn't even bother with the (almost?) all Zik gal.

That we were "all" zik was only a minor factor in the end really.
We had most of the roids in our gal divided over the 3 alliances in the winning block, and it would be close to impossible to land on any of us, since the other block was so horribly shit. This would have been the same this round also, if the politcal climate was the same. Its absolutely possible to defend this round, and not that many waves land on apprimes unless the entire block targets apprime.

And jbg, **** off. You said I would prefer to prod 2-3 ships = most of the time all in FR/DE = Fortress play. Thats bullshit.
And yes, I dont like loosing / being roided by someone who are shit when I am awesome.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Wishmaster

And jbg, **** off. You said I would prefer to prod 2-3 ships = most of the time all in FR/DE = Fortress play. Thats bullshit.

Meanwhile back in reality here's what I actually said

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

They just want to build 3 ships, preferably in only two classes, and go the entire round without getting roided.

Notice how, by explicitly mentioning the preference for "only two classes" I clearly did not mean fortress (ie one class only) play. I also didn't say 2-3 ships. I said 3 ships. Which is what almost everyone does under multi-targeting, you have your anti-fi/co ship, your anti-fr/de ship and your anti-cr/bs ship. Two of those are in your roiding fleet (or 3 if you're "fortressing" but seeing as I also clarified that that wasn't what I was claiming you preferred that's not relevant).


But hey, feel free to just randomly make up what you think I say each time I post.

[Wishmaster]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

That's not really a solution for people like wishmaster. They just want to build 3 ships, preferably in only two classes, and go the entire round without getting roided.

Not true no matter what you say.
I wish to build the best / most efficient combo of ships. Also, I cant recall the last time I had a fleet where I prodded 3 ships, I m sure you can though, since you claim I prefer to prod 3 ships in 2 classes.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Wishmaster

I wish to build the best / most efficient combo of ships.

Wow, how hilariously irrelevant to the actual point being discussed in this thread.

Also, I cant recall the last time I had a fleet where I prodded 3 ships, I m sure you can though, since you claim I prefer to prod 3 ships in 2 classes.

Ignoring the fact that I said "people like wishmaster" (seriously, reading the post at some point might be a good idea) so it's just a comment about people who dislike single-targeting, I'd guess r33 seeing as you had like no bombers for 90% of the round!

That said, let's pretend I'm totally wrong. You dislike single-targeting. Why? (If this ends up being some roundabout way of saying "my fleet is too spread out and much smaller planets can roid me" I'm going to e-kick you in the crotch.)

[Wishmaster]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

Wow, how hilariously irrelevant to the actual point being discussed in this thread.

re-read your initial post.

Originally Posted by more shit

Ignoring the fact that I said "people like wishmaster" (seriously, reading the post at some point might be a good idea) so it's just a comment about people who dislike single-targeting, I'd guess r33 seeing as you had like no bombers for 90% of the round!

That said, let's pretend I'm totally wrong. You dislike single-targeting. Why? (If this ends up being some roundabout way of saying "my fleet is too spread out and much smaller planets can roid me" I'm going to e-kick you in the crotch.)

god man. you gonna bring up r33? A round where I asked what the worst possible combo was gonna be, and then played that? Ye man, thats how I like to play planetarion. I played that round as I hate planetarion being played basicly. Was boring, but I got some good xp and some roids. The sort of planetarion you idiots seem to enjoy. I got roided alot, and I got alot of roids / xp.

Seriously, I think you know why people dont like single targetting. Its about how people want to play planetarion.
Right:
I dont want to be stopped by a tiny deffleet which is noloss for the defence.
I dont want to be roided by someone I cant attack in return.
I dont want to be roided by someone who mass 1 ship ( beetles this round )
I dont want to buy all the ships. I want to pick which ones I want to produce, and not be forced to prod all. Atm the only thing you get to pick from is % you invest in the different ships. ( more or less )

Also, I dont know really. I just havent played many FUN singletargetting rounds. Why this has been the case is probably a mix of the mentioned reasons I dont like it, and shit stats.
I know I actually did enjoy r14 ( or was it r16? the round all races had 1 stealship! ) and that was singletargetting, but other than that I have more or less always stopped playing after 2 weeks.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Wishmaster

god man. you gonna bring up r33? A round where I asked what the worst possible combo was gonna be, and then played that? Ye man, thats how I like to play planetarion. I played that round as I hate planetarion being played basicly. Was boring, but I got some good xp and some roids. The sort of planetarion you idiots seem to enjoy. I got roided alot, and I got alot of roids / xp.

I brought up r33 as a joke. I use exclamation marks to try and convey humour/sarcasm on the internet. I must admit I don't prefer single-targeting myself. As I've said before elsewhere I'm a fan of the defensive, hard-working aspect of PA. However most other people don't seem to be.

Also, I dont know really. I just havent played many FUN singletargetting rounds. Why this has been the case is probably a mix of the mentioned reasons I dont like it, and shit stats.
I know I actually did enjoy r14 ( or was it r16? the round all races had 1 stealship! ) and that was singletargetting, but other than that I have more or less always stopped playing after 2 weeks.

(I'm not replying to the bit where you gave your reasons, they're fair enough, albeit rather obviously slighted in your favour in their phrasing). Just as a matter of interest how many multi-targeting rounds would you say you enjoyed/playing the whole through/whatever you actually mean?

[Gio2k]

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

Oversimplification (or just plain wrong).

It's called generalization.

[Mzyxptlk]

Considering that the forums are largely frequented by active players (or "hardcore players", however you want to call them), and that the debate is ongoing, I refer to my previous post.

[Gio2k]

Now that is just plain wrong. I am active, but not hardcore :P
But to the point: I am playing this round with a very casual gamestyle. I haven't participated in my alliance's attacks at all this round, mainly because the TP time is too late for me, having TP at 1am in the morning means usually staying up until around 1.30am, or worse if you have to coordinate teamups and such. So no attack for me. I also send defense only after 8am or so when i wake up to get ready for work.
Even so, i find myself enjoying this round, because i get to launch retals and land frequently, and I can't really prove it, but i think it has a lot to do with this rounds stats (I am zik, so it's not because i am massing beetles or something like that). Single targetting definitely gets my vote as active casual player.

[Linkie]

I agree as a semi-active casual player this is a very enjoyable round. Calcing is a lot easier and takes a lot less time than usually. Attacking is easy enough so that I can ignore incs and just retal if I don't have the time or just plain can't get def from my alliance, but at the same time, putting in that effort feels worth it when you do succeed.

[Light]

After thinking about it for a while, its hard to say weither Single Targetting is as awesome as i think it is.. As it could just be an awesome set of stats (and if we stick with Single targetting next round, we could get a crap set).

but if this round is anything to go by, i'd suggest that we keep it as single-targetting until we get bored of it or need another change.

The noob can now more easily learn the stats and whats needed against what.
The casual player will get roided as usually but he can now also attack alot easier.
The active is still rewarded for activity and value, he just cant fortress himself.. The only way to make yourself immune from incomings is through well organised defence (which is the way it should be).
Smaller alliances can attack easier.
DC's can DC alot easier, taking possibily the most annoying PA and making it simplier is a massive plus.
Retals are everywhere, I personally hate that almost every attack i do.. results in me getting retaled but from a game perspective, its pretty good. I mean, if you leave your base undefended, you should be hit

The only drawback i can see, is that we have to keep the rounds to 7 weeks and no longer than that. As once an alliance becomes dominante or the competition starts to slack/give up.. then that alliance can wtfpwn and farm alot quicker and easier than before.

but to be honest.. Weither its single-targetting or multi-targetting stats, its clear that it should always be JBG who designs them (if he wants to).

[Zaejii]

Originally Posted by Light

The casual player will get roided as usually but he can now also attack alot easier.

your casual player must not be attacking with Cat FI, Xan CO, Xan FR, or Ter BS.

The active is still rewarded for activity and value, he just cant fortress himself.. The only way to make yourself immune from incomings is through well organised defence (which is the way it should be).

um.. no they aren't? the value players this round are mostly all fortressed and immune to most incoming through their gal/bp/late signup or by farming ships (hi agar3s!). everyone else is on the outside looking in as usual.

Smaller alliances can attack easier.

um... no they can't. with multi targetting it takes up more of a person's fleet to cover something so its pick and choose what gets covered. with single targetting everyone truly gets different incoming that mostly takes 1 or 2 fleets in galaxy (or ally) to cover due to the nature of 0 loss defence and such.

The only drawback i can see, is that we have to keep the rounds to 7 weeks and no longer than that. As once an alliance becomes dominante or the competition starts to slack/give up.. then that alliance can wtfpwn and farm alot quicker and easier than before.

this round the winner was decided before 3 weeks was up. are you seriously suggesting that a longer round would have actually caused alliances to decide to fight for #1 instead of blocking to secure planet ranks?

[Light]

Originally Posted by Zaejii

your casual player must not be attacking with Cat FI, Xan CO, Xan FR, or Ter BS.

Cath Fi is extremly strong to attack with...

and even if they went Xan FR or Ter BS, it still has a very good chance of landing against other casuals.

um.. no they aren't? the value players this round are mostly all fortressed and immune to most incoming through their gal/bp/late signup or by farming ships (hi agar3s!). everyone else is on the outside looking in as usual.

Yes, so they're only immune due to being able to get defence. Plus, with this block war, even some of the top galaxys are good to solo on due to 'no defence' pacts.

um... no they can't. with multi targetting it takes up more of a person's fleet to cover something so its pick and choose what gets covered. with single targetting everyone truly gets different incoming that mostly takes 1 or 2 fleets in galaxy (or ally) to cover due to the nature of 0 loss defence and such.

So its easier to DC, as you know instantly what ships you need and you dont usually need alot of fleets to do it.

this round the winner was decided before 3 weeks was up. are you seriously suggesting that a longer round would have actually caused alliances to decide to fight for #1 instead of blocking to secure planet ranks?

No, i was saying its a drawback.. If the round was longer, Apprime would of just been dominante for longer and it would be more stagnate. As once an alliance takes a nice lead or the block against them fails (which they all inevitably do) its alot easier for Apprime (or the winning alliance) to pwn everyone.

I.e. if we was multi-targetting this round and everything political was the same.. Apprime wouldnt get as many top planets as they will this round, due to it taking more effect/time to knock everyone else down. While now, by the end of this round, Apprime (or Apprimes allys) will dominate the planet rankings, i doubt the block will even get 1 top 10 planet, maybe struggle to even get a top20 planet depending on how ruthless Apprime becomes.

[Zaejii]

Originally Posted by Light

Cath Fi is extremly strong to attack with...

not when you get 5+ def fleets every time you launch, or 4-5 alliances trying to fc you whenever you do get a chance to land. we launched waves of over 1.6mil fi the other day and they were easily covered while the same alliance had an fc launched using the same class ships.

and even if they went Xan FR or Ter BS, it still has a very good chance of landing against other casuals.

Steinmetz has mostly landed fakes this round with his FR (and by fakes here i am referring to pods only, not fr pods masked as something else).

Yes, so they're only immune due to being able to get defence. Plus, with this block war, even some of the top galaxys are good to solo on due to 'no defence' pacts.

not to be rude, but can you point out any of these planets to me on irc sometime? (see the comment about the cat fi up there^)

So its easier to DC, as you know instantly what ships you need and you dont usually need alot of fleets to do it.

my comment here was regarding your comment saying attacking was easier. i don't deny that its easier to DC (with the exception of fakes, but that takes experience to sniff out). it is easier to cover small alliance incoming of 2-3 waves per planet due to more efficient targetting and 0 loss defence (pillagers, centaur, locust, wyvern, barghest, etc).

the rest, oddly enough, i agree with. the final rankings will be lucky to have an exp planet or two in the t10 with what should be apprime value planets. agar3s probably has a chance be in the mix considering the only incoming he was receiving was from the asc fi crew, and baasb had a legitimate chance until he started crashing.

[Light]

Originally Posted by Zaejii

not when you get 5+ def fleets every time you launch, or 4-5 alliances trying to fc you whenever you do get a chance to land. we launched waves of over 1.6mil fi the other day and they were easily covered while the same alliance had an fc launched using the same class ships.

I dont know what you're doing but ive found it pretty easy to land solo with.

not to be rude, but can you point out any of these planets to me on irc sometime? (see the comment about the cat fi up there^)

Depends on which side of the block you're on... but an example is like 14:6:6. Theres afew more left scattered around the universe if you have time to look and theres still alot of galaxys where half cant defend against you, so depending on your fleet class (i presume cath fi?) just look for a galaxy which doesnt have any enemy ETD's in it (either none or they are friendly), then they've got to cover you with anti Fi going straght up against your beetles.. In this scenario, its better to launch at around 7:55 after the alliance has used up most its Fi or its gone out attacking.

my comment here was regarding your comment saying attacking was easier. i don't deny that its easier to DC (with the exception of fakes, but that takes experience to sniff out). it is easier to cover small alliance incoming of 2-3 waves per planet due to more efficient targetting and 0 loss defence (pillagers, centaur, locust, wyvern, barghest, etc).

I think its half and half, its more simpler to DC and its easier to attack (or at least feel like you can hit them). As they need defence to cover you, otherwise you're going to pwn them and depending on your fleet, they need 1 ship. For example, when i attack now.. i dont even need to calc, I only need an AU if im hitting a zik to check to see if they've stolen any of my counter ship.

the rest, oddly enough, i agree with. the final rankings will be lucky to have an exp planet or two in the t10 with what should be apprime value planets. agar3s probably has a chance be in the mix considering the only incoming he was receiving was from the asc fi crew, and baasb had a legitimate chance until he started crashing.

BaasB never crashed did he?

[Zaejii]

Originally Posted by Light

Depends on which side of the block you're on...

ah, that explains it. asc isn't part of any block so there are a few alliances begging us to attack with them, but everyone is defending vs us. oddly enough, some of those same alliances begging us to attack with them, are also the ones doing the fc's.

BaasB never crashed did he?

he didn't crash hugely, but he has landed some sketchy landings lately. (notice he isn't in the t10 anymore).

[Light]

Originally Posted by Zaejii

ah, that explains it. asc isn't part of any block so there are a few alliances begging us to attack with them, but everyone is defending vs us. oddly enough, some of those same alliances begging us to attack with them, are also the ones doing the fc's.

lol, Its the problem of sitting out.. everyone wants to be your friend but no-one is your friend

he didn't crash hugely, but he has landed some sketchy landings lately. (notice he isn't in the t10 anymore).

He hasnt done any sketchy landings lately, he isnt top10 as he got roided badly and since then hasnt be allowed to go out attacking. He isnt top10 anymore, due to him not gaining any roids/xp while everyone else around him is enjoying the open farming.

[Zaejii]

could've sworn he died somewhere. was probably just bad info. i haven't talked to him personally for some time now.

[Gio2k]

Originally Posted by Zaejii

not when you get 5+ def fleets every time you launch, or 4-5 alliances trying to fc you whenever you do get a chance to land. we launched waves of over 1.6mil fi the other day and they were easily covered while the same alliance had an fc launched using the same class ships.

You call 5 def fleets easily covered?

[Zaejii]

Originally Posted by Gio2k

You call 5 def fleets easily covered?

when they're sent within 5 minutes of the tick, yes. especially when you're launch/relaunching with 3-4 other people over the course of 8 ticks and every one is covered by different fleets and all 5 minutes into the tick.

[Mzyxptlk]

As an attacker, I'd take a 1:5 attacker:defender ratio any day of the week. Then again, as attacker, I'd be sending a little more than 4 fleets (lol 4 fleets) when I'm attacking.

[green_cat]

i dont mind single targeting. Lame of players that want to quit because of that. same others can say , we will quit if its multitargeting

about App: tja best players might be there , thats why maybe to reconsider tag size? then good players have to devide:P

however no matter what i say you guys will see it as bad :P
but i had to say it

[Annie]

I would like to vote for sextet targeting next round, I think it would really help me in my calcs.

(for Theam that means 6, its has nothing to do with Sex)