Round 42 shipstats discussion

[isildurx]

Well that would make phoenix 0 loss def vs both fr fleets, not sure how good that is.

edit: the Broker change that is

[Patrikc]

Phantoms bro, Phantoms!

[isildurx]

Yeah I guess. I don't know about the "massive farming possibilities" connected to a change in the Lancer tho. It's not like valuestealing would be possible, and just stealing a ton of emp ships isn't the greatest thing in the world.

[M0RPH3US]

The lancer change is good.

for anything weakening DE anymore i am absolutely against it, so scratch that idea please

however terran is still OP with like only cath co and etd/ter bs able to roid em

but now with another co targeting ally def ship(lancer), what about changin the Harpy from FI to FR

1) cath co gets upgraded a lil (still not the very best choice)
2) there is at least a slim chance for xan to hit terran (if they use co in addition)
- however with a lot of anti co ally def fleets that will be hard enough.

the only other thing to reduce the OP´ness of terran might be the removal of the salvage bonus, though i´d do that in addition to the suggested Harpy Change even!

[Paisley]

IF lancers are going to be made FR class anti DE

Consider changing the Pegasus from DE class anti FI to anti FR then change the Phoenix to FR class anti Fi

[Zeyi]

Originally Posted by M0RPH3US

The lancer change is good.

for anything weakening DE anymore i am absolutely against it, so scratch that idea please

however terran is still OP with like only cath co and etd/ter bs able to roid em

but now with another co targeting ally def ship(lancer), what about changin the Harpy from FI to FR

1) cath co gets upgraded a lil (still not the very best choice)
2) there is at least a slim chance for xan to hit terran (if they use co in addition)
- however with a lot of anti co ally def fleets that will be hard enough.

the only other thing to reduce the OP´ness of terran might be the removal of the salvage bonus, though i´d do that in addition to the suggested Harpy Change even!

I agree on the lancer change but not further nerfing of Terran or the Fr anti DE. They have holes like every other race, and are easily roidable by cath co, and other BS. Cath CO has always been OP if anything, so I don't like the idea of making that stronger.

All this about the salvage bonus removal, might make sense in a MT round, but wasn't the idea of Terran always being able to land for losses? Without their salvage bonus they surely can't do that especially in ST.


I'm for once stuck on which race to go as they're all very appealing (bar etd, until these recent changes, which I now need to take another look at) with distinct holes and strengths.

[M0RPH3US]

Originally Posted by Zeyi

All this about the salvage bonus removal, might make sense in a MT round, but wasn't the idea of Terran always being able to land for losses? Without their salvage bonus they surely can't do that especially in ST.

huh?

you dont get salvage from attackin!

[Zeyi]

Originally Posted by M0RPH3US

huh?

you dont get salvage from attackin!

Yeah I know.


Attacking - land for losses and gain XP. (If that's how you play, I know people generally don't do this anymore, but it may look that way in the calc then they'll just run their fleet so you actually take 0 losses).

Defence you land for losses if you get salvage. This was my point sorry for ambiguity.

Seems to me Terran was designed for taking losses, so not having 0 loss defence ships (they already have the highest armour, so this makes sense?) and therefore a 25% or similar salvage bonus could be justified. It's just over many rounds little things like this get forgotten.

[Shhhhhhh]

With Lancers moved to Co hitting Co, The Broker is still a good option to build. Since as some mentioned already, if you go with Lancers instead and attack with FR, you leave yourself open to Phoenix defense.
Sure for ETD's who attack with BS the Lancer is better, but for the ETD who go with FR, it's not an easy choice.

So instead of making other changes after changing the Lancer, maybe it's better to try and stay as close as possible to the current shipstats, since everyone seems to like these.
Ofcourse changing efficiencies wont have a big impact, but changing targetting or shipclasses, often means other things need to change again too to balance it.
In a ST round where theres quite some holes, switching 1 targetting around has a big impact.

[Reincarnate]

i agree with shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, dont change too mcuh (like targetting) as this stats are pretty decent. just tweak efficiencies.

[Demort]

I'm in agreement with sh7 and reincarnate these stats after the lancer change are good enough bar a few efficiency tweaks keep the broker ship class and target the same

[Kaiba]

I dont think Terr BS is all that opped anymore tbh - im assuming DE fleets are gonna be in abundance and tbh i think it falls down against Chimeras.

http://beta.planetarion.com/bcalc.pl?id=exx2yu9qks9xoxy

I think there both realistic fleets (please correct me if im wrong) - but i cant see these valuewhore planets landing those kind of attacks.

I know BS can roid others but if DE is in abundance there should be lots of Chimeras about to ward off such attacks

[Shhhhhhh]

That battle is a loss for defenders, only you didnt add in value/score on defense, so they got an extra salvage boost for being small.

I dont think Terran BS 'falls down' vs Chimera's, or vs anything actually.
But the good thing is that it doesn't defend vs itself, so all the Terran BS players will have just as much trouble defending vs Terran BS as the rest of us.

Also it fits in nicely with the shipstats this round, (and i dont think they're too strong) almost everything is difficult to cover with same eta or lower eta defense ships, but easier to cover with the higher eta ships.
Only there's no higher eta ships than BS

[Patrikc]

Originally Posted by Shhhhhhh

That battle is a loss for defenders, only you didnt add in value/score on defense, so they got an extra salvage boost for being small.

You don't get extra salvage for being small, you get less salvage for being big.

I'll fiddle around with stats tonight, I'm quite sure I'll only change the Lancer and settle the rest with efficiencies.

[isildurx]

I think the stats look very nice. However, please convince appoco to remove salvagebonus for Ter, as imo Ter might very well be the best race (at least defensively).
I fear that zik + ter will be a very popular combo in alliances. I hope I'm wrong though.

[Reincarnate]

the good thing about ST is that if an alliance go very heavy in just zik/ter they will leave themselves very open to certain other attack fleets. imo, a spread of races is the way forward in ST, but thats just me.

[isildurx]

Well, seeing as terrans only real weakness is anti co, and anti co is going to be Terrans primary defship. I daresay an alliance of pure Ter could work very well, the only problem being they can't roid xans.

[Zeyi]

Originally Posted by isildurx

Well, seeing as terrans only real weakness is anti co, and anti co is going to be Terrans primary defship. I daresay an alliance of pure Ter could work very well, the only problem being they can't roid xans.

How so, they're also weak to other terran bs, and anti co is only the primary def ship if a lot go cath co, otherwise they're going to need a lot pegs and chims too.

[isildurx]

Ter BS can obviously roid other Ters, however, I don't think it's going to be too hard to get enough DE flack to make a Ter BS fleet pull :\
If it is a BS centric round then I expect to see Ters having twice as much DE as BS and send half of DE in def and half faked as BS on att.

I think that Terrans won't really be able to hit bigger Ters with their BS very well, except if the xp is nice.

http://beta.planetarion.com/bcalc.pl?id=upvfxf7mo8vb8z5

That's a fairly realistic calc imo, assuming there will be a Ter heavy uni.
Not going to take a lot of def to cover that call.

[Kaiba]

but the bigger allainces dont play for xp they play for value that why i cant see there being much terr bs - especially in a de heavy universe whichit will be - the only ppl landing for xp will be smaller alliances and its rarer to get BS players in them as most opt for fi/co or fr/de due to less activity and therefore better def response times which the eta advantages.

One bigger alliance might go different and go fully CR/BS maybe (possibly DLR or Apprime) but i cant see it being benefical overall - DE is the far superior choice.

Im also a big believer in not mixes fleets in ST round - for that reason i cant see Xan FI and Cat Co partnering well - its too easy to concentrate on 1 type of def forcing a recall which then leaves the other attacker to die so they recall too.

This imo is why there will be lots more DE , FR and CR fleets around then BS, CO or FI. Purely for the teamup aspect and higher chance of landing.

[isildurx]

I dunno, I think an alliance focusing on fico for att and frde for def could work tbh, especially in a crbs heavy uni.

[Shhhhhhh]

Originally Posted by Patrikc

You don't get extra salvage for being small, you get less salvage for being big.

I'll fiddle around with stats tonight, I'm quite sure I'll only change the Lancer and settle the rest with efficiencies.

Actually its the other way around, you get the normal amount of salvage if you're not small, and an extra boost if you're smaller.
For calcing purposes it's important that you calc with the normal amount, so 10% of resources in attacking ships killed. And 15% of defending ships.
To get this you have to fill in a decent score in the bcalc, since it compares the score you put in with the scores in beta atm ( So even putting in 1mil which may fit with the amount of fleet you have put in the calc and makes sense, could end up giving a very unrealistic result since it compares that 1 mil score with the far higher scores in beta atm and you get a ton more salvage than you would in an actual battle) . If you fill in nothing you get the full bonus as if you were tiny.
Which makes defense look good in almost any battle.

http://beta.planetarion.com/bcalc.pl?id=mnzeedpvolk1dbi - for example would be the battle isil posted, only with realistic salvage amounts, 10% of attacking ships and 15% of defense ships. Ofcourse the xp gained is messed up now, but it does show the defenders losing a ton more value even after salvage.

As for Terran salvage bonus, since in recent rounds there has been a change from the normal heavy armored, bad init ships, it makes sense to remove the salvage bonus yeah.
The only problem would be that you'd have to put it back if shipstats return to the more traditional set up for Terrans.
For shipstats this round tho, i think it's clear no salvage bonus for terrans is more balanced.

[Kaiba]

errmmm... couple of things i spotted - chances are you wont get a 1.3 mill planet hitting a 13 mill planet - and if you did he would have a damn site more de ships than 400k value if the attacker had 400k value of attack ships.

A more reralistic calc is:

http://beta.planetarion.com/bcalc.pl?id=mhtlnf3r2rwrear

The defender is twiuce as big score and value wise than the attacker and i added a third value to his de fleet seeing as he is twice the size...

In this now more realistic battle the defender only loses out 20k value on fleet after salvage and teh rest is lost in roids which is always gonna happen.

The attacker on the other hand loses 35+% of his attacking fleet - anything over 25% is considered a crash is what i was taught in ASS which was a training alliance - so 35% is a recall for sure - even more so in a high end alliance.

This is why i think Ter BS is hard to play cos between getting roided easy by other Ter BS and Cath Co planets they will also struggle to land on chimeras - it makes things VERY messy imo - and in a de dominated universe (which it blatantly will be btw) there will be ALOT of chimeras!!!

[isildurx]

Eh... that's 1.3m vs 1.3m in my calc dude...

[isildurx]

Originally Posted by Kaiba

The attacker on the other hand loses 35+% of his attacking fleet - anything over 25% is considered a crash is what i was taught in ASS which was a training alliance - so 35% is a recall for sure - even more so in a high end alliance.

The % of ships lost really doesn't matter at all. It's how long the roids take to pay back that matters. Aspects such as; time left in the rounds, mining bonus, chance of keeping the roids, and time to repay the losses is so much more important than the actual amount of losses.

[Kaiba]

sh7 - seriously man recheck your calc it has 7 0's on the deffer side and only 5 on the attacker - its actually 130 mill planet vs 1.3 mill in your calc - but regardless by calc is more accurate for saying about hitting bigger planets.

Isil: although that is true losing 1/3 of your fleet to land a bigger player is pointless the xp gain makes you stick out like a sore thumb and you now have less ships to att and def with

[isildurx]

If it's early round then losing 1\3rd could easily be worth it. Later in the round losing 5% of your value could be unacceptable. As I said, a lot of factor are important.

[guzlic]

Ter bs is by far the hardest attacking fleet to stop, every other attacking class has a ship that counters it with no loss, doesn't it? Sure you can say that ter cannot stop bs inc effectively, but then again, only xan with Spectre can, other races are not in much better position.

Other thing is that being weak to co attacks is not that big of a deal, if a wave slips trough ally def, 1 zik de def fleet ingal stops 3 man teamup on you, cause you will flak with your de, which you will have to build. Seeing that cat is the only race with co attacking fleet, and that we cannot expect an ally going all cat co, i don't expect many high value co planets, so that makes it much less threatning to ter planets.

So you have the strongest attacking fleet, very strong (if not strongest) defence, and salvage bonus on top of all. If that is not OP then i don't know what is...

I like the Lancer change, it will really make etd much more interesting to play. Ofcourse it is a one more reason not to go cat co, so making ter stronger again there, by making ally eta anti co ship that fires unchallenged.

[Patrikc]

Originally Posted by Shhhhhhh

Actually its the other way around, you get the normal amount of salvage if you're not small, and an extra boost if you're smaller.

I probably phrased it improperly, however your statement...

Originally Posted by Shhhhhhh

That battle is a loss for defenders, only you didnt add in value/score on defense, so they got an extra salvage boost for being small.

...was referring to a bcalc that had no score entered, in which case it assumes maximum salvage bonus. This can only decrease, even if you're only 50k score it will decrease slightly. [salvage bonus (or penalty) is based off how close you are to the average top 20 players' scores]


Fixiing stats now.

[Patrikc]

This should be it... Might have missed something, nothing big though.

Chimera: Damage 26->25

Beetle cost reduced from 95/118/95 to 95/110/95
Viper initiative changed from 3 to 2
Roach efficiency increased by ~7%
Tarantula efficiency increased by ~5%

Revenant cost increased from 68/68/68 to 84/84/84 
Revenant damage increased by 1, armour increased by 2 and ERes by 10.

Corsair cost lowered from 70/70/80 to 65/65/85
Clipper damage and armour lowered by 1
Galleon changed into Bs

Lancer changed to Co->Co stealship
Recluse initiative changed from 2 to 3

Decreased Centaur's cost by ~10%
Increased Cat Cr's cost by ~20%
Increased Etd's Cr/Bs cost by ~20%
Updated some pod costs

[Shhhhhhh]

Originally Posted by Kaiba

sh7 - seriously man recheck your calc it has 7 0's on the deffer side and only 5 on the attacker - its actually 130 mill planet vs 1.3 mill in your calc - but regardless by calc is more accurate for saying about hitting bigger planets.

Isil: although that is true losing 1/3 of your fleet to land a bigger player is pointless the xp gain makes you stick out like a sore thumb and you now have less ships to att and def with

The High score in defense is simply to make sure the defender doesnt get bonus salvage.
Scores in Beta were around 20mil, so with the 1.3 mil of score in isil's bcalc the defender got a ton of bonus salvage, probably near max.
By adding in a big score on defender side, you make sure you get the normal salvage of 10% and 15%.

If you want to calc battles with incorrect salvage numbers that's up to you, however if its posted here and used as arguements for balancing it's not good.

[isildurx]

I really think Cath's are going to struggle with these stats. With no good killship and their main roidfleet comprised of four ships from two classes, it's going to be very very tough.

And this is not me being biased towards caths, I'd never go caths.

[isildurx]

I'm actually going to go as far as to say that Cath are pretty mcuh unplayable and I don't expect to see (m)any caths in the t100 apart from a couple of xp whores.

[Patrikc]

Idea to make Cat more viable; Change Locust to hit De instead of Fr? Ups their anti-De, nerfs De in general and buffs Cat Cr itself.

[isildurx]

I'm supportive of that change. Doesn't remedy all of cath's problems but helps a ton.

[M0RPH3US]

Originally Posted by isildurx

I really think Cath's are going to struggle with these stats. With no good killship and their main roidfleet comprised of four ships from two classes, it's going to be very very tough.

And this is not me being biased towards caths, I'd never go caths.

agree with isil here

cat by far the worst race this round

i´d still go for the suggested Harpy change earlier, simply to remove another alliance def ship against cath co
atm all races have one, doubt any cath co will land much

[Reincarnate]

i think car cr is very good and, obviously, teams up very well with zik cr. ST is all about the teamups. cat co isnt great but so waht, let them go cr.

[Reincarnate]

bit of a late comment but, xan fi attack fleet only having 2 ships is kinda harsh. very limiting on what they can attack considering there are no other fi attack fleets.

[Abort]

Originally Posted by Reincarnate

bit of a late comment but, xan fi attack fleet only having 2 ships is kinda harsh. very limiting on what they can attack considering there are no other fi attack fleets.

Not really... No Fi target Fi... and the only DE that targets FI is the pegasus.... yea they'll likely be in abundance... but its ingal only at least. Almost every other attack fleet has a no loss def ship...

edit: if anything it makes them stronger...

[Reincarnate]

i dont see how it makes them stronger however, your other points have merit.

[Abort]

Originally Posted by Reincarnate

i dont see how it makes them stronger however, your other points have merit.

Uhh... rather than stretching your value out over 3 ships... you only need two, thus making them more effective.

[Killeah]

Originally Posted by Abort

Uhh... rather than stretching your value out over 3 ships... you only need two, thus making them more effective.

Idd, this is atm current weakness of cath.

[Reincarnate]

Originally Posted by Abort

Uhh... rather than stretching your value out over 3 ships... you only need two, thus making them more effective.

well if you look at what xan will be attacking, not really. cat and etd and they just need to spam whateva for flak. and zik, but wont need much value on the phantom as it will do all the damage before zik even fires etc etc....

[Shhhhhhh]

Pretty sure switching Revenants from Co to FI won't weaken the xans

[Patrikc]

Changed Locust to shoot De.

Consider these stats finalized, if you see any gaping holes or oversights, speak up now or be forever silenced.

[M0RPH3US]

Originally Posted by Reincarnate

i think car cr is very good and, obviously, teams up very well with zik cr. ST is all about the teamups. cat co isnt great but so waht, let them go cr.

yeah so though we know terran can only be hit by cath co and etd bs
we accept the fact that cath co is hardly playable!?

leaving one class to roid terran ???

all hail another round of 44% Terran!!!

[Reincarnate]

what are you talking about morph3us? bs can roid ter as well., both TER and ETD bs. so thats 3. and so can cat cr can as well.

also, ter are going to have to spread their value across all ships, which most do with ST but more so for ter.

[M0RPH3US]

Originally Posted by Reincarnate

what are you talking about morph3us? bs can roid ter as well., both TER and ETD bs. so thats 3. and so can cat cr can as well.

also, ter are going to have to spread their value across all ships, which most do with ST but more so for ter.

your right cath cr might be able to roid terran (with a few losses)
and also terran bs might (with a few losses)

and teamups ofc are able to roid terran!

i correct myself only 37% terran then

[isildurx]

Terran are good defensively, but they're gonna struggle on the offensive

[Paisley]

Anyone actualy playing with the idea of going xan fi?
Im not