View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
peace of love 1st Rear Admiral

Joined: 13 Jan 2002 Posts: 306
|
Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2002 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
when i looked up the ship statistics i found a strange entry there:
race distrib. top-player
e-ray 14% 0%
mycilloid 11% 33%
human 42% 33%
kazuuula 8% 7%
nanite 25% 27%
that is a funny thing... nevertheless i think it is not important which race your are playing.
despite the first few weeks i havent used my racial type ships ( and it was the same last round ) but was able to gain my points without using them.
other then the stats may look like i think the races have no real differences as the "normal" ships rule the game and new players are using them anyway...
so i have 2 suggestions:
1) differentiate teh races more in the next round.
- make more racial type ships
- make not ALL basic ships accessable for each race.
- differ available ships in cost and production time
- give each race a special bonus like maybe
a) more/ less manpower b) faster/slower production c) faster/slower in warp or whatever else comes into your mind or those of other players.
2) why you do not add in the racial stats a column with the average points (means e.g. sum of nanite players points / number of nanite players)
i hope other players could post their opinions and suggestions as this is just meant as a raw idea...
peace
|
|
Back to top » |
|
 |
untouchable Captain

Joined: 16 Jan 2002 Posts: 146
|
Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2002 4:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I'm using the special ships and they are often very very practical! You can't tell me that you will win against a fleet with special ships which are used wisely. The problem is that most players donnu how to use their ships in this way!
By the way peace I'm sure you investigate a lot of time in this game. You have to investigate a lot of time if you want to be really good
Though I like the idea of having more special ships for the different races...
Too be continued in a few minutes... |
|
Back to top » |
|
 |
Dougster 1st Rear Admiral

Joined: 14 Apr 2002 Posts: 251
|
Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2002 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Human: bounty's very good, Pirates still havent figured out how to use em, they be expensive I think.
Kazulla: the jamming things particularly the multi emp things are horrible to fight against.
Mycyloid. The reconstructors are nice.
Nanites: Dont have an opinion.
Erays. I dont think I would ever want to play as an e ray. |
|
Back to top » |
|
 |
peace of love 1st Rear Admiral

Joined: 13 Jan 2002 Posts: 306
|
Posted: Fri Aug 02, 2002 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
i did not want to say there were no differences at all between the races. but in every round it is the same: i build those racial ships try some tactics for the sake of fun with the racial ships and then turn to use non-racial ships for the rest of the game.
all races have good ships but after all non-racial ships are more effective. and i find that a pity cause i d rather like to identify with a race having advantages and disadvantages. but yet i found no real differences between the races.
the only races which imply significant new possibilities are the nanites and partly the kazuula (i havent tested the bounty hunter yet but the pirate ship so i cant state exactly how the humans are...)
i think all players who tried the racial ships know their advantages, so i dont want to state them here again (every ship may have some kind of use in certain cases), but i want to show why i dont use racial ships by telling their disadvantages:
human:
pirateship: cool idea, but tactically inefficient for you dont know what you get with them. too expensive also.
bountyhunter: dont know exactly but why not use kamikazies instead. theer occasions the bounty hunter is better seem rare too me..
eray:
holocarrier: cool idea . but uneffective as it does no damage. you cant be sure whteher it will be activated without losing it.
holocloneship: polishes up a destroyerfleet but too special and too expensive. why not use destroyers instead?
kazuula:
empfighet: small advantage in some occasÃons . the interceptor and the fighter are better at most times...
empfighter: nice toy to get some points against a small number of enemies. worthles e.g. against large destroyer and eagle fleets (discussed before in another topic...)
even though the combination of empvessel and missle launcher seems interesting to me maybe someone could state his experiences with that...
mycilloid:
reconstructors: yes you can regenerate some ship but some how uncontrollable. worthy for some defencetactics but nothing else...
nanite:
their ships are worth to be mixed into the "normal" fleet. they are a cool add in but not really a tactic....
i judged that racial ship very hard here to enforce some discussion. i dont want to say the racial ship are bad. i wanted to say they are nice but you dont need them.
THERE HAS TO BE MORE DIFFERENCE THAN TWO RACIAL SHIPS TO DIFFERENTIATE THE RACES....
and of course it is not meant against the game and the admins who do a good job..
|
|
Back to top » |
|
 |
Dougster 1st Rear Admiral

Joined: 14 Apr 2002 Posts: 251
|
Posted: Fri Aug 02, 2002 2:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have only played human so can only comment really on those ships, but the bounty combined in numbers with the fighter differs from the kami in that you dont lose as many ships, so it makes a better defensive choice,in some circumstances.
My attempts with pirates have been awful, they seem to like to board mines. |
|
Back to top » |
|
 |
administrator Board Admin

Joined: 05 Dec 2001 Posts: 184
|
Posted: Fri Aug 02, 2002 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
we will think about more differences between the races. maybe there will be only ONE shared ship-type in each class. class 1: fighter, class 2: destroyer, class 3: cruiser, class 4: mothership. all other ships will be race-specific. but this means we have to balance the races very carefully. but we will discuss that. |
|
Back to top » |
|
 |
Dougster 1st Rear Admiral

Joined: 14 Apr 2002 Posts: 251
|
Posted: Fri Aug 02, 2002 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think that might be overdoing it a bit, surely the ships discovered on tech planets (interceptor cyclops etc.) should be available to all. Kamis too, though you could have different types for diff races I guess.
But the idea is good. |
|
Back to top » |
|
 |
Frederik 2nd Rear Admiral

Joined: 10 Jan 2002 Posts: 186
|
Posted: Fri Aug 02, 2002 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I like the idea of having only one shared ship-type in each class. It will make many different (race-specific) tactics possible and allow a player to build those ships that are optimised for your kind of strategie.
Balancing such improvements will indeed be a difficult job, but maybe the next rounds could be somewhat shorter and further balancing could be done at the end of each round?
@peace : missles and multi-emp: yes, I tried at the beginning of the round. It was not as great as suspected, but it is a nice combination. |
|
Back to top » |
|
 |
Jasler Midshipman
Joined: 02 Aug 2002 Posts: 4
|
Posted: Fri Aug 02, 2002 11:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i agree
_________________ j---oas |
|
Back to top » |
|
 |
Blazedem0n Captain

Joined: 24 Jul 2002 Posts: 134 Location: Ontario Canada
|
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2002 2:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
i kinda like it the way it is is gives an advantage to thoses who kow what to use..... |
|
Back to top » |
|
 |
Jasler Midshipman
Joined: 02 Aug 2002 Posts: 4
|
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2002 4:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
um, but i would like it better if they give each team a different off everything, there r none of the same thing, everyteam has a different ships, there r none of the same
_________________ j---oas |
|
Back to top » |
|
 |
Blazedem0n Captain

Joined: 24 Jul 2002 Posts: 134 Location: Ontario Canada
|
Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2002 6:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
yeah that would be cool but that would create a heck of alot of differences and could go bad... that would creat alot of work for the admins....... like i mean thats basically making them restart but i would like to see new ships for the different types of races  |
|
Back to top » |
|
 |
|