Why not increase build rate of

rag we akll have ideas we need someone to listen i hope mara understNDS

spamming is a tactic so of course there will still be spammers, nothing will stop it

... there will be always people spamming ...

stealing words out of my mouth and stating them on a platter better than i could * wacks species *

well, Hiigarans you are solving the wrong problem:

I completely agree (and agreed long ago), that the difference in buildrate between big and small ships is too big, motivating spamming. To close the gap, however, i do not see a qualitative difference between raising the smaller ship buildrates or decreasing the bigger ship buildrates.

If one raises the smaller ship buildrates, one has the advantage to have more parameter to adjust. This is however also the main weakness, that it offers more posibilities to sc.rew it up. Furthermore that plan creates more work, and more endless discustions that nothing will be happening at all. In a perfect world i would support your point of view, however, if you ask here 100 people to suggest a sceme to raise the smaller ship buildrates you get much(!) more than 100 answers.

Therefore i am fully satisfied wiith the second-best solution, just to cut the buildrates of few capital ships.

I`m just pointing out fact for both sides of the argument since no-one else seems to see it.

Also pike even pr on aggressive owns herc due to the energy damage and range it has

species382> simple, 1of the main funtions of capital ships was use to fast pr jump. i doubt everyone will agree on that. the bigger ships suspose to have bigger build rate to jump pr.

let`s talk on the Terran capital ships nerfe, so if u cut the Hercules build rate. i will see ppl make 2 ships (Tyr n Nirvna) spam and it is even worse in stead of 3 ships classic spam.

so when Hercules build rate go down, ppl will build more Tyr n Nirvana as both of them have longer range n better dmg per pr. on ohter side, Hercules might just serve as dummy later just like what happen to M.Epidote after the new improved on M.Chlor.

well, i wont use the Pike vs Hercules for example :) let talk on the Terran own ships. to kill 90k pr Hercules in similiar pr with either Nirvana or T.Garuda or T.Kaliuem and go with agressive. believe me, ppl will always prefer 2 turns of Nirvana (54k), rather than 10 turns of T.Garuda (9k) or even 6 turns of T.Kailieum (17k). ok, now u see the problem why ppl spam so much n refuse to use smaller ships?

i had show a simple chat sheet on other topic that if u boost T.Garuda build rate to 40 units per turn, now it willl alot worth for ppl to build . BUT, u still need 2.5x of the time to build Hercules and longer 10x.

420> i thaught i had mention the idea loooong time ago, and u were against my idea at that time? LOL

EA> lmao, are u agree or aganist the idea now? *poke EA :P but, just like i mentioned, smaller ships with 2 weapons will need to think careful when bossting the build rate, include the Pike which is very daedly for most of the ships.

I think increasing the build rates on Smaller ships might be better than cutting the build rate of capital ships more.

Most smaller ships are impratical to use, since they take forever to build enough of them. Maybe people would use more of them if they the build rates were increased.

Hiigarans, can you please explain to me, why an increasing the smaller ship build rate is much better than a cut in buildrate of he bigger ships?

As i understand the game, there is only a relative scale, i.e., only the relative buildrates compared to other ships are important. Or to rephrase it, in which way would the game change, if one cuts all buildrates the same ammount? Well in my eyes not so much.....

Further, the general fear that destroyer are spammed is in my eyes rather artificial. with a 50% cut in buildrate of the herc, it still builds 4 times faster than the pike. So even with a buildrate cut, big ships still still have a big advantage in buildrate compared to destroyer.

Also, yes pikes might either be the exception to the increase build rate rule or need to be better balanced.

Yes, so thors and garuda and swords and epidote would get a boost, while ships like taurus and R snow would have less of a boost, if any. And capitals of course would get none.

getting pike build rates up will be the worst thing since introducing water to electricity!

It has the best weapon damage spread, range 9 and a real killer on all attack stances so it will indeed need to be balanced...:S

i would say, increase smaller ship will be a good way to balnace. look on the Hercules which u guys want to nerf, so 1 Hercules per turn, 45k pr. then ppl will found out Nirvana builkd rate will be too much. ok, how about u cut the Nirvana too, the Tyr will be too much.

but, boost smaller ships build rate wont cause too much unbalance. most of the smaller ships only have 1 weapon tpe n only suitable if go with aggressive or normal attack mode (for example: Epidote vs Flysch).

with only 1 weapon type, u cant really spam much like Nirvana or Pyth. once u nail on the wrong stack, ur stack will be whiped out in no time either in nail on enemy Destoyer (Pike vs Epidote) or wrong shielding (Epidote vs Lictor).

well, i know some smaller ships have 2 weapon type. now that`s what we need to consider when boosting the build rate. those ships will be the next favour of spam. that`s 1 of my reason i against Collective H.Galleon have 2 weapon type.

ok sometime to point out.

Generally smaller ships (talking destroyers and cruisers of most non guard playable races here) have got much more damage output at even pr than the bigger ships. The disadvantage is generally less hull and less damage `spread` to different areas (like only energy damage or only missile damage). They also generally have `worse` shielding than the bigger ships but alot more range.

I know I`m pointing out the bleeding obvious here but seriously, making smaller ships build faster will possibly screw the game balance up so much it is then unrecoverable and forced to revert to pre-small ship update.

Just some things to consider

collectives don`t have V class :P

why not leave the game as it is ?
how are you gonna do this :
`if one cuts the buildrate of bigger ships, it predominantly weakens virals` ? if Virals leave from what they RE from the other races , doesn`t the other races face the same problem in achieving Pr quickly ?
... I guess the big problem will not be for Virals but for Maru ... but you are the experts , not me

Ragnarok, your argumentation for or against spam is nice but rather off-topic.

If or if not spam is encouraged depends on the relative buildrate advantage of big ships vs the smaller one. And this relative difference is decreased/shortened by both, a decrease of buildrate of big ships, or an increase of buildrate of smaller ships.

The only difference lies in the absolute pr values of an average fleet. The main consequence of increasing the buildrate of smaller ships is, you helps big empires, and that in two ways:

1.) You make the average fleets more expensive, i.e., a big income OR beeing able as viral to build exordinary cheap maru ships becomes more important.

2.) With a higher average pr value of the fleet, the base pr of your empire becomes less important, i.e. a large empire does not hinder your ability to fight too much.

Well, it depends what kind of game you would like to see. I would like to play a game, where it catually becomes harder and harder to win if the empire becomes bigger and bigger, to compensate for the huge economical advantage against younger empires, to keep the game interesting.

well you can increase buildrates for races such as Terran................... i dont think terrans will ever be updated lol. :/