Beta R48

[Paisley]

Tweak ... Apparition
was
Apparition Corvette Fi - - Cloak 5 1 11 13 25 85 85 85 431 509

Now
Apparition Corvette Fi - - Cloak 5 1 10 11 25 85 85 85 392 431

Tweak tzen cr t2

Added Widow ... Cath fr class anti cr t1 bs t2

viper and scarab now init 2 previously init 1

[Patrikc]

Fr/De seems pretty useless to me, even moreso than last round (Buccs aside).

[Tiamat101]

Sooo... once again I ask, Why do we want another basicly ST round after just having a ST round.

[MiX]

I suggest making at least a few ships multi target so that people actually have some choices to make. Last round was great in that aspect, there were a lot of choices, a lot of viable ships with similar roles. For example, as a ter you could make phoenix, or wyvern and you had a choice to add gryphon. As cath there was a choice for viper or roach and spider or beetle. Xan ghost /spirit versus phantom/banshee, zik corsair or not, clipper or pirate, thief or not etc etc, Etd had pillager/tycoon as optional, De was viable, or mass Bs.

These beta stats really lack those choices. Ter is an extreme example in that it has only 1 ship targeting each class except for Cr. Other races are a bit better, but they still dont give much choice in what to build.

[Mzyxptlk]

Originally Posted by Tiamat101

Sooo... once again I ask, Why do we want another basicly ST round after just having a ST round.

Why wouldn't we?

I guess you're attempting to make a point here, but I'm seeing no supporting arguments. Surely you can do better.

[Killeah]

Originally Posted by MiX

Ter is an extreme example in that it has only 1 ship targeting each class except for Cr. Other races are a bit better, but they still dont give much choice in what to build.

Good point, if the point was to point out that targeting wise these stats are unbalanced.

If you go for ST round - you make all ships of the 5 races ST, same with MT - if you go for a mix (which seems to be the case here) you could atleast have the courtesy of balance the number of ships each race has with T2 or/and T3

(they dont have to be the same class/type - but atleast the same amount)

which leads me to why 7/7/7/7/6 number of ships for each race?

why only 6 etd ships ? - and isn't the entire point of etd that its a mix of the other 4?

I think it was rnd 41 or 42 who actually did a decent mix for etd (with decent I mean covering all types of ships evenly)

Why no Cloaked? why 3 emped of 6?

Not to sound harsh paisly, but I get a feeling the stats were just put together in 30 min

[BEER]

No other DE class? Only TER? Change ETD to have a DE based attack fleet and not so many emp ships for ETD.

[isildurx]

I don't think the stats are as bad as everyone is making them out to be.

My main gripes with the current stats:

The spider has no real use
Ter should have atleast one more ship that targets two classes

Apart from that every roidfleet has it's advantages and disadvantages, and the different races has multiple ways of being played.

[Mzyxptlk]

3 cr roiding fleets and 1 de roiding fleet seems off to me.

Agreeing with isil on Terran targeting. I would be inclined to give a second target to the Harpy (de) or Phoenix (co), for some interesting opportunities for faking.

The Ter Bs, Cat Cr, Xan Cr and Zik Cr fleets all face two 2 0 loss defense ships. The Etd Bs fleet faces one. None of the Fi, Co, Fr or De fleets face any 0 loss defense. So I am forced to ask: what's up with the Cr/Bs hate, yo? I have no problem with 0 loss defense (I rather like it, in fact), but at least balance it.

Also, 'basilik', 'behemoth' and 'termite'.

[Kaiba]

Finally bothered to look at the beta stats, agree with Isul about Terran.

3 cr and 1 de seems screwy to me... a suggestion would be...


Xan: Shadow ---> De Class
Vampyre --> De Class

It would even up the classes and also im a bit of a traditionalist and dont think Xan should have a CR roiding fleet as its supposed to be lightweight as a race with cloaking the offset to that.


The only other thing would be a 7th Etd ship, a DE class int 6 cloaked ships T1 CR T2 BS. Then remove the CR targetting from the Recluse.

[isildurx]

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

Agreeing with isil on Terran targeting. I would be inclined to give a second target to the Harpy (de) or Phoenix (co), for some interesting opportunities for faking.

I agree with this, but I'd probably give it to the phoenix as harpy targetting de would make the ter de useless.

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

The Ter Bs, Cat Cr, Xan Cr and Zik Cr fleets all face two 2 0 loss defense ships. The Etd Bs fleet faces one. None of the Fi, Co, Fr or De fleets face any 0 loss defense. So I am forced to ask: what's up with the Cr/Bs hate, yo? I have no problem with 0 loss defense (I rather like it, in fact), but at least balance it.

Are you calling emp ships 0 loss defships here? I personally couldn't care less if can get "0 loss deffed" by emp. True, the xan cr has tzen deffing against it 0 loss, but being cloaked should have some drawback no?


As for there being so many cr/bs fleets, I agree, there should have been one more de fleet and one less cr. I have no idea why this isn't the case, but yet again, I don't overly care. Neither of the CR fleets scream out as amazing to me, so that's probably the one class you really have to team up in to land.

[Tiamat101]

Few Things to change:

1) Make Xan Cr --> Xan De

2) Give phoenix a T2(co)

3) Change the ENTIRE FR/DE interaction, i hate looking at mid classes that target themselves(fr targeting fr & De targeting De) It really is pointless when you can just get suicide def to cover your fr call....

Peg t2 Fi
Chimera T2 Fr
Rogue T2 co
Cutter T1 De T2 -
Recluse T2 De
Barget T2 Bs
Maradur T1 Fr

[Paisley]

Stats tweak...

was

Tzen Destroyer Bs Cr - Cloak 6 1 32 36 88 300 300 300 355 400 Xan
Shadow Cruiser Fr - - Cloak 4 1 40 42 89 300 300 300 444 466 Xan
Peacekeeper Cruiser Cr Bs - Cloak 6 1 42 44 91 360 360 360 388 407 Xan
Vampyre Cruiser Ro - - Pod 30 1 36 38 90 310 310 310 387 408 Xan

Now...

Tzen Destroyer Co - - Cloak 4 1 24 26 83 220 220 220 363 393 Xan
Shadow Destroyer Cr - - Cloak 4 1 25 27 84 230 230 230 362 391 Xan
Peacekeeper Destroyer Bs - - Cloak 6 1 26 28 84 240 240 240 361 388 Xan
Vampyre Destroyer Ro - - Pod 30 1 25 27 84 235 235 235 354 382 Xan


Terran Phoenix now t2 De

was...
Cutter t1 fr t2 co

now...
Cutter t1 co t2 fr

Scorpion changed t1 de t2 cr

spiders increase in cost from 80 110 80 to 90 115 90 M C E

Haunt now frig

[Paisley]

If anyone is interested ... #beta is open

tonight reset starts 6pm game time ticks start 6:30pm game time

[Paisley]

tweak...
Vendor emp res now 37 was 34
Harpy emp res now 33 was 30

Barghest cost increased

[Kaiba]

Whats the first impressions then?

From the 25 mins i played last night Cat Co + Widows seemed a very strong option...

As did Ter De + Nixs


Struggling to see the benefits of Zik/Cat Cr tho tbh, the lack of 'backwards classed' ships in the BS setups means there isnt much worth stealing that will improve your fleet

Also FR looks a bit lacking right now, seems quite easy to outflak with FI and it targets itself.

ETD BS looks quite playable but the fact Terran ships are crap expect the De fleet mean it will be a bitch to play.

Xan is Xan as always i feel, what it lacks in power it makes up in fake-ability.

Cat/Xan Fi/Co round again anyone??

[isildurx]

dude it's beta, can't judge based on that..

[Mzyxptlk]

Beta can tell you nothing that half an hour with a bcalc can't, and unlike with a bcalc, your insights will be marred by people attempting to 'win' beta.

P.S. I missed your post earlier, Isil; yes, I counted EMP. Forgot to keep them apart.

[Kaiba]

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

Beta can tell you nothing that half an hour with a bcalc can't, and unlike with a bcalc, your insights will be marred by people attempting to 'win' beta.

P.S. I missed your post earlier, Isil; yes, I counted EMP. Forgot to keep them apart.

Sorry i meant that i played 25 mins and had 3 battles with Cat Co vs. Terr and Etd and Xan

I also then played with the calc for a following 30-40 mins... because PA is boring as ****

[Paisley]

last tweak

Pirate now bs only

Clipper now targets cruiser

[Kaiba]

Paisley:

Heres the question, hypothetically you're the HC of HaveN or CT leading the fight against Ultores in Rd48... as statmaker what strategy do you pick?

[Paisley]

Originally Posted by Kaiba

Paisley:

Heres the question, hypothetically you're the HC of HaveN or CT leading the fight against Ultores in Rd48... as statmaker what strategy do you pick?

good question... I made the stats in the way that there isn't 1 straight answer.

fi / co / de / cr for non bp or non fort ult targets

Frig / BS for BPed/ult fort gals

the key will be who will leak their ally strat first?

[Kaiba]

Very diplomatic

Wouldnt the precedent apply tho that if everything is equal then speed wins...

[Doffeh]

Looking forward to seeing Ult win though, again. That's what I like about these stats I guess.

[Tiamat101]

I'd Like to see some init variance in the Steal ships most likly in the clipper/mara interaction. Same init stealing just means that suicide def happens and defenders win because of salvage.

[Mzyxptlk]

Originally Posted by Doffeh

Looking forward to seeing Ult win though, again. That's what I like about these stats I guess.

Yes. If Ultores win, it will be all thanks to these stats. Thanks Paisley!

[Kaiba]

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

Yes. If Ultores win, it will be all thanks to these stats. Thanks Paisley!

Stop it! Some people still genuinely beleive that stats make a difference to the round!

To ruin that image would be like telling them Santa isnt real!

(and then HaveN would fall apart if their HC was outed as a myth :P )

[Paisley]

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

Yes. If Ultores win, it will be all thanks to these stats. Thanks Paisley!

I encourage other alliance HCs to read the art of war by sun tzu

-edit then think how they can apply it to their alliance

[MiX]

Originally Posted by Tiamat101

I'd Like to see some init variance in the Steal ships most likly in the clipper/mara interaction. Same init stealing just means that suicide def happens and defenders win because of salvage.

Agree

[Kaiba]

Tia and MiX agree on something regarding stats... that means it must never happen. NEVER EVER!!!

[Paisley]

Last change marauder init now 19 (was 20)

[Kaiba]

What does that actually effect?

The clipper was the worst of the CR targetting ships.. everything else is still hugs or kills Zik CR before it lands...

There is still 2 free fire ships on CR (Recluse and Widow) and there is 5 ships that fire earlier than anything CR has to offer damage wise..

Seeing as Zik is the only race CR can realistically land on why would anyone pick it in the firrst place??

Plus there is still far too much emp in ETD, might aswell call them 'Crap Cat', Guardian to Cloak int 4 would make ETD BS decent and make BS an actual playing option.

Cant see any sensible alliance playing away from fi/co for randoms and DE in forts

[Tiamat101]

I actually have to agree with Kiaba, and now that i've agree'd with MiX and Kiaba you know there is something WAY wrong with these stats.

[Paisley]

Originally Posted by Tiamat101

I'd Like to see some init variance in the Steal ships most likly in the clipper/mara interaction. Same init stealing just means that suicide def happens and defenders win because of salvage.

Originally Posted by Tiamat101

I actually have to agree with Kiaba, and now that i've agree'd with MiX and Kiaba you know there is something WAY wrong with these stats.

Can't please them all

[guzlic]

Originally Posted by Kaiba

Plus there is still far too much emp in ETD, might aswell call them 'Crap Cat', Guardian to Cloak int 4 would make ETD BS decent and make BS an actual playing option.

I don't see how BS is not already a playing option, if anything it is OP, unstoppable on attacks...

[VenoX]

Originally Posted by guzlic

I don't see how BS is not already a playing option, if anything it is OP, unstoppable on attacks...

Having played a bit of beta on friday and a brief conversation with paisley in #beta, the aim of these stats is to make all attacks unstoppable. Mission accomplished. Gonna make for an awful round for the people who care for their roids (most of PA I'd guess) and make fencing and avoiding incs an absolute must. For me personally it's perfect though, losing roids is what I do best.

[Kaiba]

Originally Posted by VenoX

Having played a bit of beta on friday and a brief conversation with paisley in #beta, the aim of these stats is to make all attacks unstoppable. Mission accomplished. Gonna make for an awful round for the people who care for their roids (most of PA I'd guess) and make fencing and avoiding incs an absolute must. For me personally it's perfect though, losing roids is what I do best.

Precisely VenoX, yes Terran is sick on attacks but so is everything... Terran is woeful on defence though. Cat Co/Xan Fi, Etd Fr, Zik Fr (probably what will end up being the 4 most played setups) crucify it and combined seem to be able to combat Terran BS to an extent.


As i said up somewhere in this thread, when everything is equal speed wins...

Majority will play fi/co, some will play fr, morons will play cr/bs. Cant really see de being played now i have played with the calc, its just too awkward to attack and defend with.


Pwning ship of the round: Probably the Scarab overall, Xan Fi looks the sexiest attack fleet out there though...

[Grimmy]

Xan/Cat are looking pretty strong to me right now...Cat more so.

Widows free fire on their targets (CR/BS (which is 4 of the races possible attack fleets)).

Etd get a hard time from Cat due to their FR's getting freefired on by vipers and the BS from Widows.

Not played with a bcalc yet and this is all speculation from a glancing over the b.stats a few times.

A few suggestions for ETD:-

Maybe add a BS that target FR preferably cloaked or norm (as they're lacking a ship!), change the Vendor to T1 DE (from FR) and add T2 co too the Barghest?

*Edit*

Just noticed as well that Zik's CR's are cat fodder. Scorps and Widows not getting any return fire.

[isildurx]

Why on earth are you people so concerned about 0-loss cath def vs certain fleets, its 0-LOSS ffs :\

To me zik and ter really could use some small improvements, don't like the look of them atm.

[Clouds]

Originally Posted by Kaiba

Majority will play fi/co, some will play fr, morons will play cr/bs. Cant really see de being played now i have played with the calc, its just too awkward to attack and defend with.

Morons will play BS/CR? BS/CR are looking the more viable class to play right now, offensively.

[MiX]

Honestly, most attack fleets are pretty viable, I think xan Fi is probably the strongest. In defense however, xan is pretty weak so that sort of makes up for it I guess.

Stats will never be perfect and you cant please everyone but I really feel that a few things should be addressed:
1- Most races have hardly any MT ships, cath is the only exception. Balance it a little by removing Scorpions secondary target (Cr), it is not required for the Cr attack to work (not since xan Cr got removed). There will be mass widow anyway.

2- I dont like the way the targeting goes by research hulls; Every race has eta -1 anti Cr (Hull 2), thats a lot of Cr hate. I feel that there should be at least some races that have to invest in Hull3 for anti Cr (like for anti Bs, where there are 2 races that need hull 3). Opposite to that, there are 2 races (zik/etd) that have to research hull 3 before getting any anti De, ter has no decent anti De either before hull 3. That seems imbalanced.

To fix this point I suggest to at least change the Recluse targeting from Cr/Fr to Fr/De. The Cr targeting on Recluse doesnt help Etd to attack with Fr (not since xan Cr disappeared), and the there should be some free anti De EMP (and one race less that needs hull 3 for anti De).

3- Do something with zik init please. It doesnt really matter that much what you change, but change something. Either corsair or cutlass should fire first (so that a zik with some stolen fi/co can have options), and cutter and cutlass shouldnt fire at the same time either. Every other race has variation in its init for kill ships, why is zik treated differently?

[Tiamat101]

Suggestion: Remove FR/DE/CR/BS class entirely, play with 3 races Ter/xan/Cath 4 ships per race and get rid of these Stats they suck ass.

Honestly Fix Fr/De so its not targeting each other fr targets De and De targets Fr, not Fr->Fr and De targets nothing.

Paisley its time to stop pretending and actually make stats that don't force everyone to play fi/co again.

[isildurx]

I don't see the big fuzz about same class targetting eachother, that's not exactly something new.....

[Mzyxptlk]

There's only 3 self-targeting ships, so it's not like the stats overflow with them. Additionally, 2 of those do so as T2 and 2 of them hug. So let me just put on my careface here...

[Wouter]

With these stats defending becomes pretty much useless...
Who makes stats so only attacking is a valid option?
Oh right CT HC does cause they wont ground anyway.

[Mzyxptlk]

This would be the first round in the history of PA in which Cathaar has no kill ships, with the lone possible exception of Round 10. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but that choice had better been made intentionally.

Originally Posted by Wouter

With these stats defending becomes pretty much useless...
Who makes stats so only attacking is a valid option?

This is incorrect. Even round 16, which had the offensive-est of all offensive stats, was almost won by a traditional never-lose-roids value planet.

[[DDK]gm]

Originally Posted by Wouter

With these stats defending becomes pretty much useless...
Who makes stats so only attacking is a valid option?
Oh right CT HC does cause they wont ground anyway.

Paisley is CT HC??
Paisley is CT??

[Remy]

Originally Posted by Tiamat101

Sooo... once again I ask, Why do we want another basicly ST round after just having a ST round.

We just did NOT have an ST round? Merely limited MT.

ST means EVERY ship has exactly ONE target class.
MT does NOT mean every ship HAS to have multiple target classes

[Clouds]

Originally Posted by Wouter

Who makes stats so only attacking is a valid option?
Oh right CT HC does cause they wont ground anyway.

Originally Posted by [DDK]gm

Paisley is CT HC??
Paisley is CT??

Sarcasm.

[Remy]

Originally Posted by Wouter

With these stats defending becomes pretty much useless...
Who makes stats so only attacking is a valid option?
Oh right CT HC does cause they wont ground anyway.

You are a stupid idiot, Paisly hasnt been CT since march 2011. If you want to look smart, at least check your facts first so you don't end up looking like a dumbass.