Perm BR increase poll results

R RagnarokOP

OP 09/08/2011 · 03:16 PM #1

To see original thread, visit this link

http://gc.gamestotal.com/hef.cfm?&6432&f=hef_detail&hi=10763&ch=1

Dunno why Raistilin closed the thread since there seemed to be a really good discussion going on and it appeared quite civil. However, here are the poll questions with results:

1) 2-3x increase of buildrate under a 1 week trial
Would apply to all servers would need to hear the good and bad for all sides of this

For 1, we had a total of 18.

2) Leave it as is due to implications due to x
Please include reasons if you would.

For 2, we had 6

3) Some other option
Be detailed

2, Plus 3 unknown/undecided.

Of course, if I miscounted, by all means feel free to modify or protest. I provide the original link.

Now for my 2 cents (more like 50 hehe).

Reading all the responses, I find that doing a 2x increase is probably best. However, if we do a trial, then it MUST be for an extended period of time in order to gauge its true effectiveness, not simply 2-3 weeks. Otherwise, you get what Omegian referred to: people using the opportunity to use their BTC to build up, then VM build for months until the effects wear out (thus getting extra bang out of their BTC for UW purposes).

The reason why I feel this would truly benefit the game is because the game is about stacking. However, base PR and turn/br limitations are a significant barrier to stacking. Therefore, in order to promote stacking, you have to make stacking more than a one-shot deal for these "planet hoarders". It also decreases the relevance of base PR (which ends around 10m pr unless you have an INSANE empire) and focuses on the true focus which is BATTLE.

One last note. If you`re smart, increasing BR makes ship building if you aim for the same PR. Extreme example: 500 turns building 1 herc is FAR more expensive then 1 turn building 500 herc due to UPKEEP.

I will break this down in the next post

R RagnarokOP

12/08/2011 · 06:16 PM #68

Firstly, your stats neglect to take into account shield mods, which play a very big role as to how effective a ship/starbase actually is against different ships.

Secondly, starbases, as they are designed now, are not meant to fight against ships on an equal PR basis. They were designed SPECIFICALLY with the idea that they can raise PR and evade the attacks of most opponents, buying time to build a fleet. What they lack in stats, they make up for in sheer pr advantage.

But if you think starbases are irrelevant now, they will be even less relevant if they lose their ability to out-build most ships.

A Apollo

12/08/2011 · 04:16 PM #67

not quite rag,

chimaera -
hull/pr: 2.1035
weapon/pr: 0.47
pr/turn: 21393

scorpion -
hull/pr: 1.4265
weapon/pr: 0.11
pr/turn: 73606

hoko -
hull/pr: 1.0055
weapon/pr: 0.4
pr/turn: 49725

lakko -
hull/pr: 1.4932
weapon/pr: 0.97
pr/turn: 0.97 48888

kryo -
hull/pr: 1.9952
weapon/pr: 0.08
pr/turn: 75182

chiron -
hull/pr: 1.6232
weapon/pr: 0.43
pr/turn: 36964

man-o-war -
hull/pr: 1.3333
weapon/pr: 0.56
pr/turn: 18000

diamond -
hull/pr: 1.7200
weapon/pr: 0.14
pr/turn: 139532

"then you must absolutely make them stronger in some aspect in compensation in order to keep them relevant in the strategic sense."

why do that now if was never done before (and no one complained), i see no strategic value in the bases that move up the fastest, other then "the lower the pr you use them the harder they are to kill"

M MirrorUniverse

12/08/2011 · 04:13 PM #66

@ Ragnarok Thought this was mostly about guard BR. If it is about money, then...
Almost half of the players on the rich list of any server are under 400k PR, so they aren`t exactly fighters. They just sit on their cash and amass resources. And for the people who do fight, you said yourself that it would leave more turns for infra research, thus richer empires. So I don`t think that solves anything. And if there were more than enough minerals, then all servers would have more than enough mins in the market and the hoarders would be at max.

R RagnarokOP

12/08/2011 · 03:13 PM #65

Yes, it seems that I didn`t forsee the explore UW situation, and since we can`t count on Stephen to raise the UW kill PR, then I guess the argument to exempt star bases from the BR increase will end up winning.

However, if we are to keep starbase BR the same in order to deal with the explore UW problem, then you must absolutely make them stronger in some aspect in compensation in order to keep them relevant in the strategic sense. After all, lower BR should = "better ship" (pr for pr), right?

E EvilAbadayos

12/08/2011 · 02:31 PM #64

yeah I dont see the reasoning behind the topic going towards explore UW`s when it should really be about teh BR boost but then again it does have relivance I guess.

G grantweep

12/08/2011 · 01:52 PM #63

don`t forget about the persiana!

I do wonder though, how hard it is to get over 500k PR in an explore UW. I mean you`d have BTC and 30 turns should be more than enough for most races to get you over that bump.

Although I`m not totally convinced that doubling SB PR will make explo`s all that easy...I feel like historia would be the biggest impediment to a explo UW. Say, we had a suggestion to get rid of historia...then it would unquestionably make explo UWs OP.

E EvilAbadayos

12/08/2011 · 01:48 PM #62

well using anfits mod you could use 3-5 turns to build the SB`s and a load of turns on scouts at a click of a button and be over the magic 500k PR mark with SB`s buffed to double (triple just makes it worse cos guard can`t UW anyways they are not considered for the moment).

Then just having an explore tab open in firefox ready to go and another tab with STC?BTW/Shield arties ready. True it`s no way near as easy as I just made it out to be with people refreshing on you and what not, making SB`s build faster has next to zero impact on an explore UW if the player knows what they are doing (and if they are attempting an explore UW, I really hope they know what they are doing!).

Granted Anfit would have a more first hand pov on this aspect as I have never attempted an explore UW and have no intentions of doing so.

M MajorDinero

12/08/2011 · 01:46 PM #61

Leaning towards "no" for this suggestion then, Rag. Didn`t forsee the exploration UW issue. In a perfect world, we could just get stephen to raise the UW kill PR to 1 mil to compensate for 2x SB BR. However, this isn`t going to happen...

It is really hard to get good ideas to go through in the current state GC is through.

G grantweep

12/08/2011 · 01:41 PM #60

I agree that scout BR should not be 2xed. But increasing all ship BR and not increasing SB BR just eliminates aspects of the game that are strategic and are enjoyable, such as using starbases to contest rank control. Stacking defensively with starbases. UWing. etc, etc...

I do acknowledge that the fear of explore UWs becoming too easy is valid if you 2x SB PR. Never having done an explore UW I`d leave it up to anfit to call this one.

E EvilAbadayos

12/08/2011 · 01:17 PM #59

All or nothing with teh SB boosts I say. They either all get a boost (no-one wants guard jumping 7 mill per 45 with their SB`s I assume) or zero boost at all, which is much better, due to the ability to build them in DP, thus not NEEDING them to build fast, you have atleast 24 hours to build em. They still build reasonably fast anyways.

Collectives will complain I am sure, but with their ships being the most damage to PR ratios, and building just as fast as the other races, they have little to complain about, after all they are designed to be bottom feeders, if you choose to fight high PR`s with them it`s a risk you take.

Same goes for all scounts as I have said, no boost for explo UW reasons, along with not needing a boost anyways. There has to be some drawback to having 2 C2`s, and with a scout BR boost, the one real drawback (time invested for borders, and cost of scouts, though not so much) is gone.

If you have a reason why SB`s/Scouts should be included in the proposed BR buff please speak them now so we can look into it as a community, but ultimatly the game staff/admins have the final say, so make your ideas constructive or they may very well be ignored as pointless complaining.

R Ragnarok

12/08/2011 · 12:59 PM #58

Well, the smaller starbases should at least get some boost (+25-50% instead of +100%) to keep up with the BR increase, but the larger bases like kryo, diamond and scorpion should probably get better mods if their BR is to remain unchanged so that they don`t become completely irrelevant.

M MajorDinero

12/08/2011 · 01:41 AM #57

IF these changes go through. Decreasing SB buildrate by 2x doesn`t do any good for normal, non UW gameplay.

O Omegian

12/08/2011 · 01:14 AM #56

@ Aba, agreed Scouts/SBs would be out of the equation. I missed also to mention that there will no longer be a good enough reason to bring in a black market for mineral shortages, that is the player base on that server`s fault if they don`t have a mineral miner heh. Part of the strategy of the game :P

R RagnarokOP

11/08/2011 · 11:45 PM #55

MirrorUniverse,

the reason for the mineral shortage is because of the massive influx of credits on the server. There`s MORE than enough minerals on RT, but WAAAY too much cash.

In other words, the problem with RT is credit inflation, not mineral shortage. Therefore, find a way for people to use up their cash and minerals faster and you will help alleviate the problem. Counter-intuitive, but this is economics for ya. :P

M MirrorUniverse

11/08/2011 · 07:32 PM #54

And on if I would consider this (no matter which way it goes) a major update or not, I`d say yes since it has taken awhile to get this far!

M MirrorUniverse

11/08/2011 · 06:29 PM #53

On Omegian`s points:
I feel that the problem is with one race, guardian. Why up everyone elses BR when we can just decrease guard BR. Still give guardians a buildrate advantage, just make it more in line with everyone else. And I still support giving smaller offensive ships a BR boost, but guardian buildrates are the main problem I think.

Don`t know about other turnbased, but seems that on Slow all it would take is for one or two people to VM/quit/restart in order to cause the mineral market to take a hit. As I said before, one of the reasons I don`t support this is due to the mineral shortage already taking place on RT.

I have no problem with staff going into VM for this or any other reason.

E EvilAbadayos

11/08/2011 · 04:25 PM #52

simple solution would be only to make it for offensive ships, thus removing scounts of all sorts and starbases of all sorts from teh equation.

Doing this will still make explo UW`s tricky to pull off (if someone wanted an explore UW dead, they just need to hist them anyways then it`s game over, assuming you have enough Hist/shields and they don`t have more BTC`s to recover/other arties to break the shiields).

I don`t see an issue if the above is done. Makes fighting for borders more viable if doing an expo UW or what not. True it changes the server dynamics but it would possibly make teh stale servers we currently play on (all servers are BORING cos nothing has changed really in several years). Anything to disrupt the status quo is a good thing in my eyes, it makes things interesting, more clusters will change hands from those that don`t deserver to have them to those that may be more deserving, or just as bad, forcing a feeding frenzy.

If your sitting on hundreds of planets and worried this will make it hard to keep what you have, maybe you should think about your own skill at keeping them and not blame a mear BR increase for your potential loses caused by your inability to adapt and play the game.

A Anfit

11/08/2011 · 03:56 PM #51

Rag, explo is not just scount building. You also have to jump to certain PR level.You`d have to exempt starbases too. My estimate is that with new BR (ano not affecting scounts) explo would require some 400 turns less and some 500m$ less).

R RagnarokOP

11/08/2011 · 11:53 AM #50

" sometimes you can`t just do a straight 2x-3x when you look at current ship mods and do some paper/napkin math. "

I`d like to know what ships you are thinking of specifically, and how a across-the-board 2x increase isn`t a neutral "update" battle wise. Unless of course you actually WANT to even out the BR of the different ship classes, as well as a general across-the-board increase in BR. It seems like a lot of people think this will somehow end up being a "win" for guards despite the fact that everyone gets the increase.

As for minerals, I think good old supply and demand will eventually take care of itself, and if things get out of hand with mineral shortages, you can always introduce black market to cope with the shock until supply catches up to demand.

R RagnarokOP

11/08/2011 · 11:36 AM #49

Hmm, explos as exploring?

I say that scouts should be exempt from a BR increase. We don`t really need more exploring in this game. :P

Reply