G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

How has game balance been lately?

Has anyone noticed any races that are still way over the top or ones
that are way too weak?

Which race is the weakest and with is the strongest?

Tim
 

nameless

Distinguished
Jun 18, 2002
213
0
18,680
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Lordfire wrote:
> The recent changes to the Rebels are hard to judge for me so far.
> There's probably no race to strong right now and if there is, it is
the
> Rebels.
>

There are a few more candidates.

> Among the 3rd party races the Aczanny are still too weak and the
Draconians
> still stand no chance in normal games.
> (Always assuming that they are not played by the best players
available -
> who have shown that it *is* possibe to win with these races (given
the right
> setup, that is)).
>

And I do not agree with your perception of the Aczanny. You see there
are a few races whose power rating is similiar - ie. the University
Alliance.
And maybe you want wait to hear 'til Lord Owl tells us his experiences
with the Aczanny.

> I think for both 3rd party races there exist updated version from the

> creator...
>

No, for the Dracs does not exist an updated version of the race pack -
at least not from the Creator. But there exists one from Andreas Benne
(I suggest that in case a discussion comes up about these changes that
all of you do not forget your manners.).

IMO the Aczanny do not need another boost. Tweaking the starting
position under normal host is in any case enough for the Aczanny. For
the Dracs it would not be enough.

> The only thing I (once again) really critizise about VGAP is, that
you make
> way too much money with contraband. It doesn't unbalance the game,
but it
> created a different balance, and makes the game hardly credible.
Everybody
> here agrees that you make more than 50% of your income with
contraband in
> most circumstances, I think.

Yes contra income is mostly too high. But no that is not as you might
assume because of contra trading, you need starting capital to do so.
(Luckily I am not everybody).

> And in some situations you make up to 95% of
> it. Especially for newbies this is a difficult thing to learn. Even
for
> people who played VGAP for years (like myself) it is still hard to
accept.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

The solorian is over the top,

his ability to make money with growth and contraband is far to strong.

The max growthrate should reduced to 175(crystal).



Kadesh
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Race balance? Hm, difficult question.

Perhaps the strongest race around, when you're willing to invest into
some micromanagement, are the Crystals. It's a real pain to wage war
against them (except if you have access to glory devices). Fortunately
it's also a major pain for the Crystal to use his forces effective,
so it's about even. Nonetheless, if the Crystal player is willing to
do some work, there are few races which can keep up with him.

As a corollary, minefields are of a very great (and sometimes
underestimated) importance. Every race with a cloaked barb layer is
very very dangerous. From memory this includes the Birds, Stormers,
Lizards and Peoples. If both parties in a war use minefields with all
due consequence, warfare gets very bothersome (independent of cloaked
minelayers).
Cloakers can intercept enemy fleets and lay cloaked minefields at their
position without getting noticed. Next turn the enemy fleet continues
in ignorance with full speed - badaboom. Instant disaster. And
there's no real way to protect yourself against such a thing. This
can slow down Planets into a cumbersome crawl.
Possibilities for change include a reduced mine hit rate, the allowance
to sweep cloaked barbs, increasing scan noise by minelaying, or a delay
for activating cloaked minefields (i.e. minefields decloak at end of
turn). The last one is nice and simple. I like it very much.
Such a change would also do much to strengthen the (indeed a bit weak)
Aczanny. Their greatest unbalance is an incapacity to cope with cloaked
barbs, heightened to an extreme by their very light ships.

What drags down the Federation is a lack of any money making gimmick.
They are the only core race with that problem except the Crystals
(which are so strong due to their minefields that it doesn't bother
them). Due to their other strengths the Feds don't need a big
moneyboost, but without even a small one I believe them to be the
weakest core race.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

The recent changes to the Rebels are hard to judge for me so far.
There's probably no race to strong right now and if there is, it is the
Rebels.

Among the 3rd party races the Aczanny are still too weak and the Draconians
still stand no chance in normal games.
(Always assuming that they are not played by the best players available -
who have shown that it *is* possibe to win with these races (given the right
setup, that is)).

I think for both 3rd party races there exist updated version from the
creator...

The only thing I (once again) really critizise about VGAP is, that you make
way too much money with contraband. It doesn't unbalance the game, but it
created a different balance, and makes the game hardly credible. Everybody
here agrees that you make more than 50% of your income with contraband in
most circumstances, I think. And in some situations you make up to 95% of
it. Especially for newbies this is a difficult thing to learn. Even for
people who played VGAP for years (like myself) it is still hard to accept.

Lordfire

"cocomax" <cocomax@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1111903591.331575.49710@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> How has game balance been lately?
>
> Has anyone noticed any races that are still way over the top or ones
> that are way too weak?
>
> Which race is the weakest and with is the strongest?
>
> Tim
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

cocomax wrote:
> How has game balance been lately?
>
> Has anyone noticed any races that are still way over the top or ones
> that are way too weak?
>
> Which race is the weakest and with is the strongest?
>
> Tim

What do you mean with lately ?
Some games ends at turn 40-50 and some needs much more turns, say over 100.

Under which circumstances ? Big or small or middle map and under which
host settings do you mean ? That makes a big difference.

If I remember right, some races are designed to be "quick starter" and
"weaker" at the end.

Which alliances are used in a game, make a big difference or how good
the allies work together.

Most races can become superior under the right circumstances in the late
game.

IMHO it is not possible to give an always correct answer to your easy
question.

Bye-Bye JoSch.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

>
> IMHO it is not possible to give an always correct answer to your easy
> question.
>

In that case you have answered his question with 'no' :)

Lordfire
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Lordfire wrote:
>>IMHO it is not possible to give an always correct answer to your easy
>>question.
>>
>
>
> In that case you have answered his question with 'no' :)
>
> Lordfire

I haven't wrote (said) that.

What if a race exist which never reach the late game (maybe to weak at
the beginning and quickly eliminated)? Then I can nothing say about this
race in the late game. Maybe if it come (under a competent player or the
others are so "bad") that it easy dominate the/many/each game.

So no answer is not no or yes. It's more like unknown.

IMO I can give an answer at VP based games, there are some races to
"weak" and have problems to win any of this games under "normal"
conditions. It's hard to eliminate all races with higher growth rate
before the game ends. But this races may have better changes at
"one-man-standing" games and so I understand Tim's question.

Bye-Bye JoSch.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Sorry Tim but your question is to ambiguous for an easy answer.
However, I will attempt to write down my opinion as an average player.

What races are too strong still? Well, I think that it all depends on
what game rules and map the host is using. Under the right
circumstances almost all races are able to win. However, the thing I
like about planets is that their is usually a counter race to another
race ie EE V's Rebels, Stormers V's cystals. So if players pick their
enemies right and have the right tactics anyone has a chance of
winning. Being on the front foot can also never be underestimated as a
strategy against stronger races.

In saying the above there are some weak races. Take the Feds for
example, they are such a promising race but do not live up to their
potential. Lord Owl's response is worth listening too as I think that
the Federation should be the pinup race of the planets universe and so
therefore should be ajusted in order to make them better. Other weak
races are the Azzanny, Drac's and even the UA in my humble opinion.

I guess I should have a go at answering that contra training argument
that again has raised its ugly head. Lordfire has already mentioned
that the 'everyone can use it' it arguement so I won't bother
mentioning it here. I don't use it that much but I don't care if others
use it at the same time. I think that it is a nice thing to have
because of one simple reason, time. That is to say it speeds the game
up to points where you can get to high techs quicker, bigger fighter
wings, and even tech ten ships fleets, which is really useful in a slow
turn based game like planets.

I have to say from a personal point of view the game is more exciting
for me with more ships, fighters and the like then going through the
boring stages of one on one ship battles with lasers or merc rockets as
your main weapons. The contra market trading is also a good defence
against those early predators like the EE, Rebels, Cents and others who
can quickly overwhelm in the early stages, as it gives you the chance
to buy mechs, fighters, and even ships.

To finish I think what overbalances this game is the inter race
trading. I have heard many ex-players complain about this. Even currant
players wish that races are played with their own abilities. However,
in saying this I suspect that there is nothing you can do Tim to stop
this completely. It is therefore up to the players and hosts to enforce
this. So without preaching morality to everyone, the players within the
game are perhaps the biggest inbalance in the game, just like all
others multi-player games I guess.

Robert
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

I have some ideas for game adjustments. . .

Feds make more money with their working Agrovators, maybe 10mc per
farm, would that be enough?

Readjust the contraband market, making it a bit flater, maybe up to 50%
flater. That would reduce gains from the market by 50%.

Have the Colonies of man produce 200mc per 100000 colonists that they
have on ships and increase their on board colonist growth rate to 4% to
6%.

Allow the sweeping of cloaked mines, but have it only work 25% of the
time and you do not get a message that anything happened. The Robots
would also be reduced from having a sweeping cloaked mines success rate
of 100% down to 25%.

Robots would be given a scarey new power, having to do with their
fighters.

Robots would have free fighters produced by insectoid nests.

Tim
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

As a newby, I found high growth races like Solorian advantageous and
possibly unbalanced both resource point wise and in income as against
low growth races like Dracs. Then again I find EE difficult 2 play..
but I'm learning GA for income as gave up with Contra...though its
sounding like its a one way street to riches so I might start investing
that 10,000mc turn 8 to make money....:)

Guessing from the HW's I'm scanning that have multiples of my
population at turn 10 plus and rather large cash incomes, storage
and...yes contra stock piles that I could only dream of.....contra
trading should be limited...as in limits to how much u can buy a
turn....:)

Cheers.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Hmmm... how about a change of the Holodeck.. (as previously discuessed)
-- make those with Holodecks immune to SIREN HARP (or something else
useful)

Some other doodle stuff in my head.

Privateers - because of the new(well relatively) limits of maintaining
farms reduce the amount of food that the Food Grappler in an MBR can
take to say 750 Kt per turn rather than filling its entire hold with
Food

Contra - the flatter ratio seems good.. I would of course prefer if the
negative aspects of contra be returned ( the increase of crime when you
sell them but depending on how much contra was sold rather than a fixed
rate -- still I guess other more experienced people will deal with
that)

....

Dracs need help.. just cant figure out how though.. perhaps growth rate
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

"Kadesh" <christian_hennicke@web.de> wrote in message news:<1111937642.511183.57440@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>...
> The solorian is over the top,
> his ability to make money with growth and contraband is far to strong.
> The max growthrate should reduced to 175(crystal).

I would have to agree that the Solorian is a very powerful race, maybe
too powerful on most game setups. Only low-food games limit this race
significantly. Both races have some gimmicks, but what makes Solorians
stand out is their growth paired with abilities that enhance it. But
let's start with something to support this argument.
I will use the Crystals abilities when comparing what they have.
First of all, growth rate. Both have about the same, with the Solorian
getting a bit higher on 100 temp planets. But the difference comes in
the way the Sols are able to use this growth rate more effectively.
-Both heat up planets
-Solorians have hyper-drive capable freighters, while Crystals don't.
So Solorians take territory faster. And when transferring larger
amounts of colonists Sol colonists have to spend less time in pods not
breeding. Oh yeah, and the Ground Base Chunnel too.
-Solorian have better training rates, and their troops and HG are much
much better
-Sols have a normal farming economy as a basis, but Crystals have a
special economy. Granted the Crystal lathes are better with SW Amper,
but that requires allies. Without it's much more stressful (pun
intended)
-On top of it all the Solorians have labour camps

If I were to propose a simple answer to this, it would be to remove
the Sols ability to heat up planets with colonists. This way they
would have to be much more selective about where to live, naturally
decreasing their growth.
This would be a good change, because then the Sols would actually
have to seek out the high heat stars, much like the Crystals are
always looking for high HD stress planets.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Solarain growth rate is highly dependent upon star heat ->
on some maps is some positions too strong and on some maps in some
positions too weak.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

I think 10 mc per farm with an Aggorvator would be too much. Maybe just
effectively double farm income like it does farm food?

Yes, making the contraband map 50% flatter would be an excelent idea.

I don't think the CoM needs increased powers.

Love the chance to sweep cloaked mines combined with not getting a
mesage about it idea.

Robot scarry power with their fighters = sometimes turn off opposing
high tech fighters [type 3] with their own type 3 one? [e.g. Pilot of
new Battlestar Galatica?]

If insectoid nests are going to be building free robot fighters, they
should be building the type 1s, and more over require a full insectoid
nest (100K insectoids) to produce any at all.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Yes, but one of the things the Dracs does have is a lot of minesweepers
if I recall right. So the cumulative effects would greatly help a race
that needs it.

Remember that the way the Peeps were balanced was not by changes to the
Peeps themselves but by a systmetic reductation of power of many
devices, every one of which was on the Peeps ship list.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

I carefully watch and study which races win most often. Here's my gut
feelings:

Solorians are too strong now. The growth rate is just too much. Given
their race powers I think they'd do fine with an average growth rate.
Right now they have the highest.

The Crystals win a lot, but I'm not sure how much of that has to do
with people not knowing how to beat them. For example, I often see
them winning newbie VP games. They are strong, but I wouldn't say
they're over the top.

Everyone says the Feds are weak due to the lack of a moneymaking
gimmick. I tenatively agree with them. But while they don't see the
winner's circle very much at all, I also don't see top players taking
them very often. I agree with an extra 10mc per Farm, but I don't see
the need to tie the bonus to Aggrovators.

The Aczanny need something. They aren't hopeless, but they have more
(big) disadvantages than advantages right now. The ability to sweep
cloaked minefields might be all they need. (Though I would so love to
see their homeworld start with 50k ghips for some early game punch.)

I'm still deciding on the Rebels and COM. It's very early for the
Rebels. The COM feels a bit weak, and I really like the proposed
changes.


As to the other proposed changes:

For cloaked minefields, how about just allowing people to sweep the
fields they scanned? Then enough scanners would make them sweepable,
instead of enough ships with a 25% sweep chance. And it would also
solve the perennial question "why isn't the field being swept?".

Flattening the contraband market would certainly help (and I would say
50% reduction MINIMUM), but what it's really missing is risk. And some
risk and watch people squirm. For example, a 5% chance that the
contraband traders take the buy order money and run without giving up
the goods.

I don't think the Robots really need a boost. Though free fighters is
cool.


Scytale
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

soxee wrote:
> Sorry Tim but your question is to ambiguous for an easy answer.
> However, I will attempt to write down my opinion as an average player.
>
> What races are too strong still? Well, I think that it all depends on
> what game rules and map the host is using. Under the right
> circumstances almost all races are able to win. However, the thing I
> like about planets is that their is usually a counter race to another
> race ie EE V's Rebels, Stormers V's cystals. So if players pick their
> enemies right and have the right tactics anyone has a chance of
> winning. Being on the front foot can also never be underestimated as a
> strategy against stronger races.

If I understand you right, I must always wait until one slot is free and
then can pick my race by knowing all other races in game. The poor
player who comes first is then an idiot cause he know nothing about the
other races in game. If all will do so, no more game would start cause
none would tart to fill the slots.

> In saying the above there are some weak races. Take the Feds for
> example, they are such a promising race but do not live up to their
> potential. Lord Owl's response is worth listening too as I think that
> the Federation should be the pinup race of the planets universe and so
> therefore should be ajusted in order to make them better. Other weak
> races are the Azzanny, Drac's and even the UA in my humble opinion.
>
> I guess I should have a go at answering that contra training argument
> that again has raised its ugly head. Lordfire has already mentioned
> that the 'everyone can use it' it arguement so I won't bother
> mentioning it here. I don't use it that much but I don't care if others
> use it at the same time. I think that it is a nice thing to have
> because of one simple reason, time. That is to say it speeds the game
> up to points where you can get to high techs quicker, bigger fighter
> wings, and even tech ten ships fleets, which is really useful in a slow
> turn based game like planets.

Don't agree. Some can use it better then others. Races with many colos
can sell more contra and have more influence on the price.
I would like to limit the contra buy to 1 K per Base, enough to attract
Ghips, Amps or to fill a Pod to send it to the enemy.

> I have to say from a personal point of view the game is more exciting
> for me with more ships, fighters and the like then going through the
> boring stages of one on one ship battles with lasers or merc rockets as
> your main weapons. The contra market trading is also a good defence
> against those early predators like the EE, Rebels, Cents and others who
> can quickly overwhelm in the early stages, as it gives you the chance
> to buy mechs, fighters, and even ships.

Agree, but some have mentioned before some time about 50K Wings of CoM
or Rebels. So not all seems to have the same meaning.

> To finish I think what overbalances this game is the inter race
> trading. I have heard many ex-players complain about this. Even currant
> players wish that races are played with their own abilities. However,
> in saying this I suspect that there is nothing you can do Tim to stop
> this completely. It is therefore up to the players and hosts to enforce
> this. So without preaching morality to everyone, the players within the
> game are perhaps the biggest inbalance in the game, just like all
> others multi-player games I guess.

Sorry, don't agree. Some races have so big gaps, that they must use
alien technology to close the gaps. Like Grav Mines to stop hypers or
Laser Mines against fighters or get hypers for a quicker exploration of
the map. And in "real" they would search and use such stuff to close
there gaps. Maybe except the Feds with their non use of cloaker
technologies or the Stormers with the honor and wishes to die in fights.
But this 2 races are the only ones which can board without Boarding
Laser. So for what, should they recycle the boarded ships or use it for
their best ?

For me it is uninteresting to eliminate a race which have no defense,
say I'm a the Rebel and fight the Feds or Stormer from a distance of
over 1000 LYs. Or from the other site, if I have no change to get Laser
Mines or Tachyonen Emitter I can give up to fight against a Bird.
There must be some sort of Tech transfer to give a race the hope to stop
an enemy or he can stop playing after the "wrong" enemy starts to attack
him.
For me it is a sign of cleverness or better tactics if I can eliminate a
race which use foreign ships too then to eliminate a "helpless" race. So
what may it say about someone who want to forbid the usage of foreign
ships.

IMHO Tim make the goods a bit to much, as he change that BLs no longer
work for all by a host change. Some races can never get / use a boarding
ship now and that make the Death Spec nearly uninteresting for me in my
games.

IMO there is enough (or to much) host settings with "Hull plan trading
(not) allowed" "alien hulls fight poorly (normally)" and the reduced
repairing of ships in the game to stop or slow down the usage of foreign
ships.

Bye-Bye JoSch.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

cocomax wrote:
> I have some ideas for game adjustments. . .
>
> Feds make more money with their working Agrovators, maybe 10mc per
> farm, would that be enough?

Sounds okay for me.


> Readjust the contraband market, making it a bit flater, maybe up to 50%
> flater. That would reduce gains from the market by 50%.

Why not limit the buying of contra to 1K on each Base ? Thats enough to
attract natives or fill a Pod to sell it to enemies.
>
> Have the Colonies of man produce 200mc per 100000 colonists that they
> have on ships and increase their on board colonist growth rate to 4% to
> 6%.

Not sure about the long term influence in a game.

> Allow the sweeping of cloaked mines, but have it only work 25% of the
> time and you do not get a message that anything happened. The Robots
> would also be reduced from having a sweeping cloaked mines success rate
> of 100% down to 25%.

What do you mean here. Each minesweeper ship have a chance of 25% of
success ? Then I must send out only enough ships to be nearly sure that
the cloaked mines are swept. Say groups of 4 minesweeper (not so good in
probability so maybe need 1-2 more ships).
I used cloaked Mines too and find them not so good if the enemy use
them. So for it and against it at the same time.

But AFAIR the Robos have no minesweeper so this would not much help them
and they have no cloaked mine layer that their enemies always can know
where a just laid minefield is and their minefields can only be cloaked
one turn after laying. so IMO no great disadvantage or advantage for the
Robos.


> Robots would be given a scarey new power, having to do with their
> fighters.
>
> Robots would have free fighters produced by insectoid nests.

Without the meaning and or the formulas I can nothing say about the
above 2 changes. But the Robos are so weak now that they need an upgrade ?

Bye-Bye JoSch.
 

RedHerring

Distinguished
Feb 23, 2003
40
0
18,530
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

cocomax wrote:
> I have some ideas for game adjustments. . .
>
> Feds make more money with their working Agrovators, maybe 10mc per
> farm, would that be enough?

I like it. It still takes 5 turns to pay for its self. What if you
also had it work like a Soil Reformer every 20 or so improve farm
rating by one.


> Have the Colonies of man produce 200mc per 100000 colonists that they
> have on ships and increase their on board colonist growth rate to 4%
to
> 6%.

Do you mean growth rate of 1.04 and 1.06?

> Tim
 

nameless

Distinguished
Jun 18, 2002
213
0
18,680
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

joncnunn@yahoo.com wrote:
> Yes, but one of the things the Dracs does have is a lot of
minesweepers
> if I recall right. So the cumulative effects would greatly help a
race
> that needs it.
>
> Remember that the way the Peeps were balanced was not by changes to
the
> Peeps themselves but by a systmetic reductation of power of many
> devices, every one of which was on the Peeps ship list.

The Dracs have not only many minesweepers, but most of these
ships have also barbatic minelayers. So the changed sweeping rules,
would both
help and hurt them. Not as for ie. the RCS and Aczanny whom it would
only help.
In any case it would not change much for the Dracs neither to the good
nor to the bad.

Basically the Dracs have many (slow and) cheap ships (except for the
parts),
most of them will fairly easily blow up, since they are not too sturdy.
They are also able since many of their ships have pod bays to take
their wreckage
with them, to easily replace the ships at a base, with just a Goverment
Center (for the money production) and
Military Spaceport (and enough Crew on the base).
Problem(s) with this is that in case a Scav is near the wreckage would
end
up in their hands and otherwise they still would need to wait one turn
to set
a capture target and take the pods with them - and in most cases
they will not be able to tow them along otherwise,
since their tow beams are too weak.

So one possible change could be to have any Drac owned ship that
explodes and turns
up as wreckage, be Drac owned, if any Drac ship (in the fleet)
survives, and have it automatically
dock with any free pod bay.

The biggest problem with the Dracs is, that they are designed to gain
from prisoners - the problem is that they have considering the shiplist
and
their growth the worst ability from all races in the game to do so
(even peaceful races like
Cents, UA (not much better) and Feds while get prisoners easier (if
they want)).
Their ships are designed to be used in vast numbers (except for the
occasional
Krait),but neither their growth nor their economy supports that.
And they also have no real special ability (or more than one) which
would somehow offset
these lack/disadvantages.
They are designed as an aggressive race, but with the mobility of many
other races around,
they will mostly - unless the range to the enemy is not to big on game
start - be always
on the defensive or be just attacking already evacuated areas (that is
if the enemy is not too dumb
or the spot is vacated or he just has no ability to run away, but then
most likely not because of the
Drac, but because another race does inhabitate the area/region where
the victim could run to).
 

paradox

Distinguished
Sep 19, 2002
7
0
18,510
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

Has anyone else noticed since the host change back in ?December? that
fighters (and ships) seem to orbit the center of the VCR screen and do
not actively move directly towards the enemy anymore (regardless of
attack settings)? I seem to recall that they flew more of less towards
their target before that host change. Now they just circle and only
fire weapons if their orbits "happen" to coincide with the enemy ships.

This has given fighter races (like CoM) a significant setback. I
recently had a VCR with a Virgo vs. a T-Rex. It should have been no
contest with my Virgo's 1500+ fighters, but the Virgo took a good
beating from the T-Rex until the T-Rex happened to move into the same
large orbit that my fighter's had been occupying since the beginning of
the battle, circling and circling and being useless.

This circling effect does not only affect fighters, but ships as well.
I can understand this type of effect over a planet, but even then the
effect is extreme.

That change, IMHO, has affected game balance in an adverse way.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

nospam schrieb:
> cocomax wrote:

>> Allow the sweeping of cloaked mines, but have it only work 25% of the
>> time and you do not get a message that anything happened. The Robots
>> would also be reduced from having a sweeping cloaked mines success rate
>> of 100% down to 25%.
>
>
> What do you mean here. Each minesweeper ship have a chance of 25% of
> success ? Then I must send out only enough ships to be nearly sure that
> the cloaked mines are swept. Say groups of 4 minesweeper (not so good in
> probability so maybe need 1-2 more ships).
> I used cloaked Mines too and find them not so good if the enemy use
> them. So for it and against it at the same time.

If you take 4 minesweepers (if i remember right...) the chance to sweep
would be more like more like :

odds to sweep: 1/4
odds not to sweep: 1 - 1/4 = 3/4

-->

(1/4) + (3/4 * 1/4) + (3/4 * 3/4 * 1/4) + (3/4 * 3/4 * 3/4 + 1/4)

= (64/256) + (48/64) + (36/256) + (27/256)

= 175 / 256

Well maybe I mixed something up, but what I'm trying to say is that you
can never be absoulutely sure to sweep the mines, if each ship's odds
are about 25%.


Cyio,

Jochen
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

In that case, the was to restore game balance is to fix the combat bug
instead of strengtheing fighter races.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.vgaplanets4 (More info?)

The other power the cylongs fighters have in the new series is
hyper-jumping fighters.
That would be scarry as well, and not quite over the top as the turning
off fighters and ships seen in the Pilot.