[Discuss] Multiple Targets

[MarkieC]

I know this is only a game and realism isn't at the forfront of any game, but does no-one else find it slightly unrealistic if you find an attackable planet that say is Terran which has no Battle Ships, so a cath can just walk in with Hornets and take the roids with the rest of the terrans fleet watching happily while this happens.

Don't get my wrong i've taken full advantage of the fact this is possable, but wouldn't it better to have several targets with say decreasing accuarcy.

eg.

Terran Harpy targets fighters with 60% accuarcy but then also tragets Corvettes with say 40% accuracy and maybe a third target with say 25/30% accuracy.
Dunno if this has been suggested before.

[MarkieC]

also this might add a level difficulty to the game as it stands i feel it's fairly easy to predict what fleets people are sending.

[Orion Treet]

It was this way in round before PaX (r1-9.5) but was dropped in favor of a more simple combat system which encouraged more tactical fleet composition (you used to have ships which had as third target all, and way back in the first few rounds all ships eventually targetted everything, first firing on primairy and secondairy targets till there were none of them left, but it also worked them with agility and weapon speed and another of other factors)

[MAdnRisKy]

the combat engine this way is FAR too simple, and we all know this.

And yes, anyone even remotly involved in the stats creation have all said it.

No doesn't look like they'll be a change any time soon, unless we can corner the powers that be in a dark alley....

[noah02]

so ziks would be very powerful then ?
they steal one thing then the next then the next and then the next.
Or would they be to weak with there init and get everything aiming at them eventually hence dieing rather quickly.

I dont know much about stats but if we were to do the more than 1 target would it not have to cover more than 1 tick to work?

[ChubbyChecker]

Personally I liked it when ships targetted two ship types. Targetting only one ship type is too restrictive I think, plus you can't build a sensible fleet that way.

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by noah02

I dont know much about stats but if we were to do the more than 1 target would it not have to cover more than 1 tick to work?

No, it can all be done in one tick.

The key is significantly decreasing efficiency on secondary and tertiary targets--otherwise it is too powerful.

[MAdnRisKy]

Originally Posted by Tactitus

No, it can all be done in one tick.

The key is significantly decreasing efficiency on secondary and tertiary targets--otherwise it is too powerful.

LISTEN TO THE MAN!!!

[Makhil]

I don't remember, were those T1, T2, T3 stats still in place when races were introduced ? it would be interesting to see a copy of those stats then for people who haven't seen them to understand how complex it was.

[furball]

Originally Posted by Makhil

I don't remember, were those T1, T2, T3 stats still in place when races were introduced ? it would be interesting to see a copy of those stats then for people who haven't seen them to understand how complex it was.

Yes, they were. And it made it incredbily complicated without battlecalcs.

Personally I'm happy with the stats as they are now. Players have to build varied fleets and can't just take advantage of a single ship being overpowered (aka Phoenixes r4).

[wakey]

The problem I always had with multiple targeting is it does encourage 'bashing' of a target. With single targets most fleets have a weakness, a weakness that can be exploited by others with limited losses to the attacker and as such they arent required to send as many ships at the planet. For example I can and ahve walked into attackers planets this round who are a good couple hundred of k greater than me in value and stolen roids and havent had to wipe the persons fleet out to do it, with multiple targeting this would be alot harder if not impossible.

With multiple targeting these weakness get somewhat plugged. Its perfectly possible for example to have a couple of ships that will cover all incoming types. Ok they may not be great at them but they still play a part and instead of being able to ignore ship x you now have to send ship y to deal with it. It moves the game back down the "the person who has the most ships will win" route and forces players to play to disable every target they hit

[Ultimate Newbie]

As you may have guessed, i tend to agree with the above statements. Ship stats with just one target encourage offensive play, teamwork and emphasise player skill (provided there are multiple Pod classes). How, do you ask?

Offensive play is encouraged by reducing the likelihood of the 'ultimate' defensive ship - eg the Spider in R3-5, or Sentinels in R8?-9.5. Instead, it encourages the 'best ship' each race has against a certain class - so instead of the one defensive ship, there is about three or four good defensive ships per race - a vast improvement. Thus, defensive resources are spread thinly, resulting in greater likelihood of success as easy defence is reduced. Furthermore, holes in a planet's targeting can be exploited to get cheap roids (like my 90 free roids today \o/ ). Strong and easy defence results in rounds that stagnate significantly faster than normal - which is a very good thing (as attacking is fun ).

Limited targeting also encourages teamwork - party for the above reasons; ie its more difficult to cover yourself, the defence people need is varied, and defence is generally more difficult to come by. This is a very good thing for a game that is surrounded by a community - if there was no need to communicate, then the community wouldnt have a leg to stand on.

Finally, it rewards individual player skill. In the past, defence was just a matter of sending attackers * 3 worth of spiders - so the only requirement for successful defence was sheer weight of numbers. Now, its alot more difficult and thus the better the player is the more successful they will be (to a larger extent, at least). furthermore, good players are able to exploit weaknesses in other people's fleets, which trying to cover their own (see teamwork).

The downsides of such targeting (as far as i can see), is that it rewards activity. Whilst it is arguable whether encouraging inactivity is a good thing (lo prelaunch), i think it is fair to say that the casual player which forms the majority of players is placed at a disadvantage (at least defensively). However, with these particular stats, said casual players can still attack others (of greater score - a first for PA) and still have a fair chance of success. So it kind of depends.

Anyway - i would still be in favour of two target for ships. Yes, you read correctly. I dont see why planetarion has artificially limited itself to only 6 classes of ships - i can think of at least 10 which works fairly well with 2 targeting classes. On IRC today, Kloopy mentioned the use of Aircraft Carriers - again this is suggested occasionally but never implemented. I even built a set of stats with 10 classes, but it needs a little bit of refinement still ('lo c0w ) before i'll throw them up.

Think outside the square .

[Goatsemaster]

Originally Posted by wakey

The problem I always had with multiple targeting is it does encourage 'bashing' of a target.

That's your problem with everything.

[Cannon_Fodder]

Playing previous rounds of PA and other spin-offs, I can say without a doubt this is the best package with the best stats. The number of variety of ships is about the right amount, each race with 12 ships means you have a good level of diversity, anymore and I feel that errors in the stats would be clearer, and the concept not as friendly to newcomers. I personally prefer the single targetting as it does add that extra tactical level missing to earlier rounds.

[Alki]

i think the other problem is pa teams lack of ability to make decent stats^^

[Ultimate Newbie]

Originally Posted by Alki

i think the other problem is pa teams lack of ability to make decent stats^^

grmbl...

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by Makhil

I don't remember, were those T1, T2, T3 stats still in place when races were introduced ? it would be interesting to see a copy of those stats then for people who haven't seen them to understand how complex it was.

Yes, and you can view them here. I don't think they were that complicated, but YMMV.

[Orion Treet]

Originally Posted by Nonentity

Yes, they were. And it made it incredbily complicated without battlecalcs.

Personally I'm happy with the stats as they are now. Players have to build varied fleets and can't just take advantage of a single ship being overpowered (aka Phoenixes r4).

Cutless round 12?

[wakey]

Originally Posted by Ultimate Newbie

Anyway - i would still be in favour of two target for ships. Yes, you read correctly. I dont see why planetarion has artificially limited itself to only 6 classes of ships - i can think of at least 10 which works fairly well with 2 targeting classes. On IRC today, Kloopy mentioned the use of Aircraft Carriers - again this is suggested occasionally but never implemented. I even built a set of stats with 10 classes, but it needs a little bit of refinement still ('lo c0w ) before i'll throw them up.

Think outside the square .

I was going to say the same in my post but cut it out as part of my incresed effort to keep my posts short (well shorter)

As you said multiple targets could work with more classes so as not to allow people be basically be untouchable on just a couple of ships types and tbh I've always liked the idea of having more classes. I've included such a thing in some of my ideas over the rounds and always supported your call for having more classes. The problem I feel though of doing this is highlighted by the following post

Originally Posted by Alki

i think the other problem is pa teams lack of ability to make decent stats^^

This being that both players and pateam believe that its possible to have balanced stats. They dont realise its what I call a 'Unicorn' idea. Like a unicorn ideas such as stats being balanced are mythical beasts. You just cant balance stats as theres too many external factors that you cant predict. One of them for example is us, the players. In an ideal world the race distribution should be 25% of players to each race but that doesnt happen. An uneven race dstribution then sets everything off balance and if you then try and take this into account and make once race more appealing theres a good change it just shifts the balance too far the other way.

Anyway what i'n trying to say is the reason we dont have more classes often comes down to the belief taht balance is possible but that too many ships makes it harder to balance. Where as really they should be looking at ensuring the stats are as fund to play as possible due to realising balance wont be possible and the next bets thing is just to make the game fun.

[Ultimate Newbie]

Originally Posted by wakey

part of my incresed effort to keep my posts short

Actually, i had noticed! . Usually i put my kettle on before i read your posts and it finishes before i've read the lot, but sometimes i actually have to wait for it!!

This being that both players and pateam believe that its possible to have balanced stats.

I personally believe that there is a 'balance spectrum' for want of a better term - you have a point at one end of the spectrum where it is completely balanced, and on the other it is completely unbalanced (like requiring a mid-round change). There is a threshold, however, where the perception is balanced - even if it isnt quite. Achieving total balance is rediculous - achieving perceived balance is a valid goal.

though i admit - its pretty hard .

One of them for example is us, the players. In an ideal world the race distribution should be 25% of players to each race but that doesnt happen.

Certain measures have been discussed by the stats community (lol, all what - three of us? ) and we have been taking measures to try and reduce the impact of race imbalance (This round's stats are a prime example, though the credit is definately not mine - i was trying to go the other way [making stats defensive] because everyone else was making them offensive :\ ).

Anyway what i'n trying to say is the reason we dont have more classes often comes down to the belief taht balance is possible but that too many ships makes it harder to balance.

I've found the hardest part about making stats is following the 'rules' - eg for this round (iirc) Kal wanted something 'along the lines of R12 stats', which wouldnt have implied stealing again for ziks, yet once Banned had made them Kal was overjoyed. If it was easier for those who comission the stats to know what they want, it would be easier to build them 'right' - thus having more time to focus on the same ideas - thus greater testing --> more balance.

just to make the game fun.

Cant disagree with that mate .

[WesseH]

right...

as i recall.. the point of single-target combat system is to make people more obligated to COOPERATE with one another

make defending eachother a requirement for survival and attacking together THE way to efficient combat...

but hey... we're only a few thousand people playing here... and there's no "computer" or "AI" to compete with! so it would be a whole lot better for the comunity if everybody can survive on themselves and doesnt need anyone else anymore!

[wakey]

Originally Posted by WesseH

right...

as i recall.. the point of single-target combat system is to make people more obligated to COOPERATE with one another

make defending eachother a requirement for survival and attacking together THE way to efficient combat...

but hey... we're only a few thousand people playing here... and there's no "computer" or "AI" to compete with! so it would be a whole lot better for the comunity if everybody can survive on themselves and doesnt need anyone else anymore!

I'm not sure that multi targeting actually does that though. To reduce losses in multi targeting enviorment you have to really go out to overkill a target, which is either going to mean you need help to attack or you need more help to defend . I really do believe a game where every person is vunrelable like they are now is BETTER for solo players because it removes the need for you to have backup to take others on in attack as long as you take a moment to work out the planets weakness and how you can exploit that..

Anything which encourages players to hit to wipe out the person fleet is imho bad for the game as its people getting their fleet bashed with drives people away becasue once thats gone and your roids are down you are going to struggle to get back up and running again.

And before someone attacks me for 'mentioning' bashing again. I mention it because its something whcih the game need reduced for it to grow,. And bashing isnt something thats just a newbie issue, everyone of us is suseptable to bashing and if it works and we lose our fleet that our round pretty much ended . Most of those who are caught out simply then lose intrest in the game because while roids may be where we gain score the vital part to this process is the ships and its losing them which is the killer blow (It stops you regaining roids and it alos loses you score, its like a double hit)