"Gamey" tactics like "Rock, none" races

[PvK]

Originally posted by Thei R'vek:

quote:

---

Originally posted by spoon:

- Having three ship-training facilities on a sector is better than having only one.

Definitely, gaining all the way up to 20% experience in only 3 turns instead of 7 is a major advantage. However, the experience bonuses are not a MAJOR advantage per se because there are other options which give an advantage roughly analgous to that of having 20% experience bonus

---

Well, my objections to the moon training are mainly that 1) It makes no sense, and 2) it prevents me from modding an absolute limit of 1% per turn maximum rate, which I want for Proportions mod.

As for other options giving an analagous advantage to training, that's not valid in the standard set, particularly with faster than High research costs, because it doesn't take long to research to the max, and since the advantages stack additively, any 20% stacking advantage that your opponent doesn't get (and you can get another 20% with fleet training) is a MAJOR advantage, which can turn the tide of battles, and which in this case costs no maintenance or design space.

quote:

---

- Using PPBs in the midgame is better than using anything else.

I would say that PPBs are probably the best all-around weapon in SE4. They can target anything but seekers, do major damage compared to other direct fire weapons with the same fire rate, and they are fairly inexpensive when compared to other, more powerful, weapons.

---

I agree PPBs are somewhat too cheap, too easy to research, and too potent. However, I don't think they're necessarily the best. For one thing, many players never deploy unphased shields, leaving PPB Users with overly expensive weapons limited to range 6. Unless your opponents are using a lot of unphased shields, APB or MBs are generally more efficient, for example.

PvK

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by PvK:
Well, my objections to the moon training are mainly that 1) It makes no sense, and 2) it prevents me from modding an absolute limit of 1% per turn maximum rate, which I want for Proportions mod.

I understand your objections, and don't disagree it's gamey and should be fixed. I wouldn't even try to make the point that 20% training isn't tremendous, almost a requirement at some points in the game. The only point I was trying to make was simply that the 4 turns you save getting to the 20% isn't all that critical in most circumstances.

As far as your desire to mod that 1% maximum, why not eliminate the sector training facilities and allow all races access to the system training facility the psychic races have in the stock game. IMHO it makes more sense for training to be system wide anyway, and you can limit those to one per system effective.

Geoschmo

[Puke]

okay, i admit, the moon training thing is really annoying. not so much in the standard game, but more so in games with more moons. like FQM games. when you have 5 or 7 moons in one sector, you can train ships to full in a single turn. THAT could be abusive. I would indeed like a per-sector limit on training. or even an optional per sector limit, in the form of another ability, or a variable, or somesuch.

[PvK]

Originally posted by geoschmo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by PvK:
Well, my objections to the moon training are mainly that 1) It makes no sense, and 2) it prevents me from modding an absolute limit of 1% per turn maximum rate, which I want for Proportions mod.

I understand your objections, and don't disagree it's gamey and should be fixed. I wouldn't even try to make the point that 20% training isn't tremendous, almost a requirement at some points in the game. The only point I was trying to make was simply that the 4 turns you save getting to the 20% isn't all that critical in most circumstances.

---

I agree. It's not a big balance problem. It's mainly annoying. It is a valuable thing to do if it's allowed, it tends to reduce the interesting need to spend time and maintenance resources training a fleet, and it doesn't make any sense and smacks of munchkinism. So, I'm simply saying I'd be well pleased to see it fixed, and I'd usually prefer to have a house rule in games I play to not do it. That's all. No big deal. I'm only posting repeatedly because some people said they didn't understand why it made no sense, etc.

As far as your desire to mod that 1% maximum, why not eliminate the sector training facilities and allow all races access to the system training facility the psychic races have in the stock game. IMHO it makes more sense for training to be system wide anyway, and you can limit those to one per system effective.

Good idea, although I kind of like the difference, and the need to sit in a particular sector while training, mainly because it's an interesting tradeoff during play (to move to a more tactical position, or two train up). So I think I'll just mention that I recommend players not use the exploit (if they're playing Proportions, presumably they are wanting more realism, and will be happy to comply), and hope it eventually gets patched out.

PvK

[Thei R'vek]

Originally posted by Puke:
okay, i admit, the moon training thing is really annoying. not so much in the standard game, but more so in games with more moons. like FQM games. when you have 5 or 7 moons in one sector, you can train ships to full in a single turn. THAT could be abusive. I would indeed like a per-sector limit on training. or even an optional per sector limit, in the form of another ability, or a variable, or somesuch.

I think I may do something about this in the USEF MOD. Make the training facilities one-per-sector effective and the psychic one-per-system effective and then making the psychic ones more expensive as all the racial techs have been moved into the standard tech tree in the USEF MOD.

[spoon]

Originally posted by geoschmo:
Uh, spoon. The gameplay results are the reason for playing! It's what makes this a game, and not just a spreadsheet or a ship design program. It's the only thing that can keep someone interested in this game for going on two years now.

Agreed! But here we are in the Forum -- not playing the game, but discussing the game. When discussing the game, having statisitcs is better than having gameplay results, I'd argue.

If this is what you really believe, I feel sorry for you. Because you are missing the beauty and the challange of the game.

I have to like the game for the same reasons you do? That's a peculiar stance... Before you tell me more, I'll admit that I do in fact enjoy the game for the same reasons you list. However, I don't let my enjoyment of the game cloud my analysis of the game.

I don't disagree with you about your list of things that are smart choices. But they aren't the only choices. There are so many variables in this game that no one strategy can win every time, you said it yourself. And even a very good strategy is only as good as the paper it's printed on.

You were asserting that these sort of things didn't matter because they could be countered. I was claiming that they gave you an edge that could be difficult to overcome.

What separates the losers from the winners in this game is not the ones that design the best startegies. It's the ones that counter their opponents strategies the best.

True. However, having a strong race design is still significant, and a poor race design can all but guarantee failure.

- Having three ship-training facilities on a sector is better than having only one.
Well, duh! But is it better than what you could have used those extra facility spots for? Depends on the spefic game, but I can think of several cases where it wouldn't be.

hehe, yeah, obviously you don't want to squander facility spots on training in backwater regions of your empire. I meant on strategically important sectors, where having a triple spaceyard/fleet training/ship training configuration can be pretty important.

- Using PPBs in the midgame is better than using anything else.
Slightly maybe. You might be able to design an PPB ship that would defeat an equal size and tech cost ship in one on one combat. But what would it prove in a real game? Not much. Very few combats are one on one involving empires with exactly equal levels of technical development.

Not sure what your point is here. I say PPBs are better than any other mid-game weapon. You agree(sorta), but say there are other factors. Of course there are other factors. I never tried to claim otherwise.

Having 125% defense + bezerker will make you unbeatable against people unaware of how combat works.
If you are playing against someone that doesn't understand how combat works, you are already unbeatable, combat bonuses or no.

- Having 110% Maint Reduction is a huge advantage over people who don't realize how broken Maint Reduction is.
See previous answer.

Hehe. True, true. Thing is, there are a LOT of players that don't realize this... and that it can be discouraging to play a game for six months only to lose because you didn't realize the significance of race design options. I'd rather these sort of tactics be downplayed, and that a newish player can learn from his mistakes in time to make a difference in his current game(s).

-spoom

[Fyron]

Hehe. True, true. Thing is, there are a LOT of players that don't realize this... and that it can be discouraging to play a game for six months only to lose because you didn't realize the significance of race design options. I'd rather these sort of tactics be downplayed, and that a newish player can learn from his mistakes in time to make a difference in his current game(s).

That all depends on who you play against. I've won some PBW games with really crappy empire designs.