|
12 Mar 2015, 18:51
|
#1
|
idle
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 968
|
Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
Hi all,
as most prolly know i spent some time with creating stats lately - and i stumbled over a significant problem which is called "Same Class Firing".
Having for example Frigates shoot at Frigates results usually in unplayable scenarios where the attacker is not able to land his attacks against his own race(similar shipbuild) - as the defender gets the salvage while the attackers looses his value.
And the higher the D/C of those ships is, the less appealing it gets for the defender to stay - so in worst case you have 2 loosers in the very end.
And since PA is a value game afterall, "Same Class Firing" needs to prevented by the stats maker - cause no one wants a dull and boring round with no attacks landing or silly 1 fleet recalls.
After all its not so much the problem that Frigates target Frigates, but the same init firing for Attack and Defence.
So why not add a second initiative - and seperate Attacks from Defence.
This way a ship can fire early when used to attack, but fire late when used for defending - or ofc the other way round.
Example:
TER Pegasus FR-CLASS targets T1 FR T2 DE AttInit: 6 DefInit: 8 ......
This would open up a new dimension for Stats Makers and as a result a new dimension for us players without changing the Game principles and without making it random or overly complicated.
Yes such a Set might be harder to balance and also harder to read - but for sure the new Possibilities are weighting more then those downsides.
Discuss please
__________________
m0rph3us formerly known as Bugz
"Itīs 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!"
|
|
|
12 Mar 2015, 19:00
|
#2
|
Mordar, Keel, Reip
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Finland
Posts: 333
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
I've been pondering a bit about a similar idea, it would add some more complexity to the game without really stabbing anyone in the face... but, there comes the question about who to give the advantage to, or is it the statsmakers choice... offensive vs. defensive inits with more offensive or defensive stats etc.
__________________
Wolf in a pirates clothing to the highest degree, standing behind the curtains.
All the war propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting. - George Orwell
|
|
|
12 Mar 2015, 19:03
|
#3
|
idle
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 968
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
would be up to the stats maker ofc - or the one deciding in the very end
__________________
m0rph3us formerly known as Bugz
"Itīs 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!"
|
|
|
12 Mar 2015, 22:22
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 846
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
I suggested Earlier that ships have Conditional init Modifiers, but i like this one a lot better. It would certainly allow for more diverse stats. Because now you could make a ship that has high attack init but has low defense init making that planet still able to attack while he isnt immune to that specific class.
__________________
R50-55 Faceless
|
|
|
13 Mar 2015, 00:23
|
#5
|
General (Adjective Army)
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yorkshire, England.
Posts: 825
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
I seem to remember that, in the early rounds, the defenders fired before the attackers. I think that this applied by individual ship not to the entire fleet(s).
__________________
Amnion (aka The Arcane Chas of Arcania) - Playing PA under those and other pseudonyms every genuine round since Round 2. Most recently (and insignificantly):
Onset of Apathy R94 | Stacks of Resources R95 | The Necromancer of Dol Guldur R96
70 Years of Queen Elizabeth R97 | Worst of The Worst R98
Knights of the Green Shield R99 | Look Out of The Window R100 | Most of All R102
Hard of Hearing (2:7:1) R103 | The Lateness of Your Application (1:6:6) R104 | Kinnison of Tellus (5:1:2) R105
|
|
|
13 Mar 2015, 07:22
|
#6
|
idle
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 968
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
Then maybe the code exists allready?
However, even though i got pretty much no real idea about coding, a second iniative shouldnt force to rewrite the whole battle engine!?
As its probably just 1 routine to check before calcing a ships damage - Attack 1 or 0, then go to column x or y to find iniative.
At least in my world this sounds easy
__________________
m0rph3us formerly known as Bugz
"Itīs 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!"
|
|
|
13 Mar 2015, 14:07
|
#7
|
Sains
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 331
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
It's definitely the case that in earlier iterations of the game, defenders fired first where the inits were the same. I'm in favour of a more variable design, and this sounds like an interesting idea - though there's a risk that it may lead to an even greater dichotomy of attack and defence ships, with the limited fleet variation and strategy that comes from that.
While we're stuck with a clear attack / defence dichotomy, however, I think it makes perfect sense to work with it. It certainly shouldn't be difficult for the battle code to work out which side's which.
__________________
☠ | ROCK | BowS | Sains
|
|
|
13 Mar 2015, 14:55
|
#8
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,038
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
this will defiantely incrase the stat making difficulty
__________________
Did some stuff, played here n there done just about all there is to do
|
|
|
13 Mar 2015, 15:48
|
#9
|
Knightly Protector
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Avalon
Posts: 590
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
Its an interesting concept and does definitely introduce more tactical/strategic element to the game. Only reason I would be opposed to it at the moment is that I dont think PA needs to be complicated even more; adding more ways to play the game, yes; making it harder for new players or semi-casual players to play, no.
If the code exists or just needs slight modification then go for it. Having a different way of playing your planet or the game is always good. However if it requires some major changes I would rather have the PA team work on current issues instead of introducing new features where the possibility of unwanted repercussions is unknown.
(If you are wondering what is high on my list of things that need fixing, its the shuffle formula and how to keep galaxies at 7-9 planets even though there are not enough BPs. Basically have the shuffle code not rely on BPs to make galaxies. Also keep refining/changing BP sizes 4+1 is a good step but i would rather see BPs of 3 with no late starter.)
__________________
TGV Ex-HC
-No I am not suffering from insanity. I am enjoying every minute of it.
Est Sularus oth Mithas
My Honour is My Life, My Life is My Honour
|
|
|
13 Mar 2015, 17:57
|
#10
|
Retired
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Back Porch Bar
Posts: 2,593
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
I was thinking about something like this the other day as well...not sure it would work without further complicating creating/balancing stats. Something needs to change...
As mentioned earlier, in previous rounds the defending ships fired first when dealing with ships of the same initiative on both sides.
__________________
I'd rather be fishing.
Utterly useless since r3
|
|
|
13 Mar 2015, 18:26
|
#11
|
idle
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 968
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RexDrax
Its an interesting concept and does definitely introduce more tactical/strategic element to the game. Only reason I would be opposed to it at the moment is that I dont think PA needs to be complicated even more; adding more ways to play the game, yes; making it harder for new players or semi-casual players to play, no.
If the code exists or just needs slight modification then go for it. Having a different way of playing your planet or the game is always good. However if it requires some major changes I would rather have the PA team work on current issues instead of introducing new features where the possibility of unwanted repercussions is unknown.
|
i agree that coding time should be spent on more important features - however i am thinking this would be a small change to implement
i personally feel some time should be spent on coding a interface that is easily used from mobiles and i would think the bot planets are worth to think about
^^ if we are adding wishlists now
__________________
m0rph3us formerly known as Bugz
"Itīs 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!"
|
|
|
16 Mar 2015, 04:22
|
#12
|
Retired
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Back Porch Bar
Posts: 2,593
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
Paging mz to the thread...
__________________
I'd rather be fishing.
Utterly useless since r3
|
|
|
16 Mar 2015, 14:30
|
#13
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
Thread seen. Opinion neutral. Carry on.
__________________
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.
|
|
|
16 Mar 2015, 19:05
|
#14
|
idle
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 968
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
__________________
m0rph3us formerly known as Bugz
"Itīs 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!"
|
|
|
8 Apr 2015, 20:32
|
#15
|
idle
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 968
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
iīd like to hear some more thoughts about this tbh - as it seems ppl actually (so far) like the basic idea
it would safe us all from the same stats over and over again - or completely "weird" ones like we have em this round (though i personally enjoy the round so far)
__________________
m0rph3us formerly known as Bugz
"Itīs 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!"
|
|
|
9 Apr 2015, 02:15
|
#16
|
Retired
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Back Porch Bar
Posts: 2,593
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
I'd also like to keep chewing on this idea. I haven't had much time for PA lately, but I think this is worth investigating further.
__________________
I'd rather be fishing.
Utterly useless since r3
|
|
|
11 Apr 2015, 04:07
|
#17
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 846
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
We should find out if how possible it would be to code this into the game, and if its not that hard lets get this implemented. This is the kind of change that will make the game less Cut and dry, and more strategy based. At the moment most rounds the "strats" are usually 1 or 2 class-based.
__________________
R50-55 Faceless
|
|
|
11 Apr 2015, 15:40
|
#18
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 707
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiamat101
We should find out if how possible it would be to code this into the game, and if its not that hard lets get this implemented. This is the kind of change that will make the game less Cut and dry, and more strategy based. At the moment most rounds the "strats" are usually 1 or 2 class-based.
|
possibly... however i believe this kind of change will mean further unbalanced stats. Not that it matters to me.
|
|
|
13 Apr 2015, 23:47
|
#19
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 477
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
Don't like it, don't seem to bring much to the game other than confusing people.
|
|
|
14 Apr 2015, 11:06
|
#20
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
I dislike this too, but I've been refraining from saying so, because I really don't have any argument why.
Therefore, feel free to disregard.
__________________
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.
|
|
|
3 Jun 2015, 03:55
|
#21
|
Commander in Briefs!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 783
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
I love the idea, but the stats need to be made less huge, perhaps reduce to 3 races.
EMP
DAMAGE
NANO.
Some of the ships have the extra ability to cloak, so it keeps that strategy open..
Note: ETD goes and dies in the corner..
EMP Resist needs to change to EMP Shields(basically guns to freeze), to make the stats a little easier to understand.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing
__________________
<Kila> WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH MY PRECIOUS FORUMS
<Zeyi> 24h forum closure
<Zeyi> all posts recalled
"he's got a proven track record when it comes to showy art composition" - Tommy
<Sigi> Light: can I ask u how many open internet-windows u always have?
<MrLobster|PM> i have 2, the pa page, and the website for naked light pictures
<Ave> both has bad gfx
Last edited by MrLobster; 3 Jun 2015 at 04:05.
|
|
|
6 Jun 2015, 03:07
|
#22
|
Commander in Briefs!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 783
|
Re: Add Another Iniative (Stats-Mechanics)
or just thinking off the top of my head, inits are shifting by 1 in favor of the defender?
So the defender get to fire the init first.
Att #? / Def #1
Att #1 / Def #2
Att #2 / Def #3
Att #3 / Def #4
however I just noticed that the current stats dont include any fire on self ships (that I can see).
__________________
<Kila> WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH MY PRECIOUS FORUMS
<Zeyi> 24h forum closure
<Zeyi> all posts recalled
"he's got a proven track record when it comes to showy art composition" - Tommy
<Sigi> Light: can I ask u how many open internet-windows u always have?
<MrLobster|PM> i have 2, the pa page, and the website for naked light pictures
<Ave> both has bad gfx
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:44.
| |