Topic: GW 5 Balance Issues  (Read 19459 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26162
  • Gender: Male
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #100 on: April 07, 2005, 09:37:26 am »
Actually I was referring to stock carriers rather than fighter, my bad!  With all these SFB based ships that carry fighters is it anywonder they are so frequently appearing?  Stock list usually didn't have such a high percentage of fighter and Pf carrying ships in their list excepting the Hydrans

Offline Kroma BaSyl

  • Romulan Tart
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2276
  • Don't hate me because I'm beautiful.
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #101 on: April 07, 2005, 09:42:58 am »
I think DH's solution still addresses that. A carrier with admin shuttles as fighters is pretty much just another line ship as AI, and what is the difference if I draft an AI ship without fightrers that as a V in it's designation or not. As long as it doesn't have the fighters then it really isn't a carrier, for all practical purposes.

It has always been a problem with these scripts that you tend to draw the same ships over and over.
♥ ♥ ♥  GDA Kroma BaSyl  ♥ ♥ ♥
GCS Prima Ballerina
GCS PHAT Gorn
GCS Queen Kroma


Because this game makes me feel like  a thirteen year old girl trapped in a lizards body.

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #102 on: April 07, 2005, 09:44:29 am »
Actually I was referring to stock carriers rather than fighter, my bad!  With all these SFB based ships that carry fighters is it anywonder they are so frequently appearing?  Stock list usually didn't have such a high percentage of fighter and Pf carrying ships in their list excepting the Hydrans

Ahh, my bad

So what about nerfing the Type 1 fighters so it doesn't matter if you draw a carrier?   That;s the best that can be done without new mission scripts.
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26162
  • Gender: Male
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #103 on: April 07, 2005, 09:48:04 am »
Actually I was referring to stock carriers rather than fighter, my bad!  With all these SFB based ships that carry fighters is it anywonder they are so frequently appearing?  Stock list usually didn't have such a high percentage of fighter and Pf carrying ships in their list excepting the Hydrans

Ahh, my bad

So what about nerfing the Type 1 fighters so it doesn't matter if you draw a carrier?   That;s the best that can be done without new mission scripts.

Not a bad idea.  Definately a decent experiment to conduct.  Might want to ask for any objections if done midserver however.

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #104 on: April 07, 2005, 09:49:25 am »


Not a bad idea.  Definately a decent experiment to conduct.  Might want to ask for any objections if done midserver however.

I just sent out the email, I think this can be done server-side so it will NOT require a download.
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26162
  • Gender: Male
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #105 on: April 07, 2005, 09:53:57 am »


Not a bad idea.  Definately a decent experiment to conduct.  Might want to ask for any objections if done midserver however.

I just sent out the email, I think this can be done server-side so it will NOT require a download.


One problem is that some of the ai carriers might be pushovers without the fighters, making ships at certain BPVs hex flipping monsters and this might not apply equally to all races.

Only other side effect I could see is an increase in ai wild weaseling.

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26162
  • Gender: Male
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #106 on: April 07, 2005, 09:55:37 am »
Might want to start the test run by making every second squad of fighters into shuttles to see what happens, ie use baby steps.

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #107 on: April 07, 2005, 09:56:22 am »


Not a bad idea.  Definately a decent experiment to conduct.  Might want to ask for any objections if done midserver however.

I just sent out the email, I think this can be done server-side so it will NOT require a download.


One problem is that some of the ai carriers might be pushovers without the fighters, making ships at certain BPVs hex flipping monsters and this might not apply equally to all races.

Only other side effect I could see is an increase in ai wild weaseling.

No, they can't build WWs with them.   It does not work like that.

Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26162
  • Gender: Male
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #108 on: April 07, 2005, 09:58:49 am »

No, they can't build WWs with them.   It does not work like that.


Well that is one less concern, I still wonder about the other one.

Offline Corbomite

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2939
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #109 on: April 07, 2005, 10:11:12 am »
Any carrier that does not have any or sufficient weaponry to be considered a viable ship w/o fighters should retain them for the AI. Yes this means someone will have to be the judge.

Or simply get off this tract and design a user friendly D2 list like we wanted to oh so long ago.

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #110 on: April 07, 2005, 10:20:51 am »

No, they can't build WWs with them.   It does not work like that.


Well that is one less concern, I still wonder about the other one.

A Kzinti  worrying about helpess AI   :rofl:
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


el-Karnak

  • Guest
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #111 on: April 07, 2005, 12:41:54 pm »
I just don't know what to say about this server. Yesterday morning I was so frustrated trying to do something to hold back the Green Wave. There I was in my CM while the 7 or 8 Rom players that were on, were eather in Carriers, BCHs, or a DN. So I decided to hit where they weren't. I did eight missions, and what did I pull? Carriers!!!!!!

In those eight missions I pulled nothing but SUB's or KR7Vs, or the thing with the R torp and fighters. Lost two CMs to the AI in those missions. I guess WarSears was wondering what was up when he Drafted me. As soon as I saw that he was flying a SUB....I SD my ship.  I guess the old saying goes. When it stops being fun. Why play?


Is that a plea for more or less restrictions?

I see what you mean by the AI Carriers, they come up WAY too often.   I know an easy way to make them less of the pain and it will be implemented in all future servers.

A SUB is beatable in a G-CM, it's been done this server (Chased off at least).

I guess what has me ticked off is all the Farking Carriers!!!!!!  I have no problem with live players with Carriers.  It' just the AI has gone nutzo for Carriers.


Use special role "V". Depending on the missions GW5 is using that could help. In EEK, the secondary AI can't be CVs.  In addition, if you really want the offensive AI CVs out but want players to fly them then make all CVs has SPECIAL hull class.  Again, I can only speak for EEK thingies.

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #112 on: April 07, 2005, 12:49:23 pm »

Use special role "V". Depending on the missions GW5 is using that could help. In EEK, the secondary AI can't be CVs.  In addition, if you really want the offensive AI CVs out but want players to fly them then make all CVs has SPECIAL hull class.  Again, I can only speak for EEK thingies.

Your scripts don't like my list :(

Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


el-Karnak

  • Guest
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #113 on: April 07, 2005, 12:54:01 pm »

Use special role "V". Depending on the missions GW5 is using that could help. In EEK, the secondary AI can't be CVs.  In addition, if you really want the offensive AI CVs out but want players to fly them then make all CVs has SPECIAL hull class.  Again, I can only speak for EEK thingies.

Your scripts don't like my list :(



Oh, then u have a shiplist loaded with CVs and no class restrictions.

Yer screwed then. :P

Try SPECIAL class anyway. It might help.

Offline Age

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2690
  • Gender: Male
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #114 on: April 07, 2005, 01:01:17 pm »
Or a plea for a shiplist without so many of the new fangled carriers, seems like ever since we went with the SFB style shiplist for the GW servers all we get are ftrs and pfs, pfs and fighter, and more fighters and pfs.  Stock fighters were preferable IMHO.

The GW4 fighters were mush weaker than Taldren stock fighters.   The SGO4 were way too tough, nobody disputes this.


Yo kroma, how do you think this arguement is going to shift after 2282?

Yeah I will attend to agree with this as I kept getting fighters in every AI mission not pvp in SGO4.The thing I liked best about SGO4 is allied starbases in allied space to resupply.

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26162
  • Gender: Male
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #115 on: April 07, 2005, 01:09:14 pm »

No, they can't build WWs with them.   It does not work like that.


Well that is one less concern, I still wonder about the other one.

A Kzinti  worrying about helpess AI   :rofl:

We gotta keep Hexx in his place you know, if he started being able to beat the ai on a regular basis he might just start getting uppity  ;D

Offline Julin Eurthyr

  • Veltrassi Ambassador at Large
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1057
  • Gender: Male
  • Back in Exile due to Win 7 - ISC RM/Strat Com.
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #116 on: April 07, 2005, 01:23:29 pm »
Once again, Taldren's insight / failure to add BPV to ships for consumables bites us in the posterior.

I've gotten sick and tired of the carrier draws on most every server I've played on, unless specific steps were taken to balance the carrier situation before hand (usually requiring shiplist edits)...

It gets annoying when a 160 BPV CA draws a 175 BPV CVD, then watching 30+ BPV of fighters come out of the shuttlebay nearly every mission...

Servers where the BPV of (at least the stock) fighters were completely included in the ship's primary BPV cost drew proportionally more accurate carrier draws, which usually resulted in smaller carriers as opposition (ie, a CVL in a typical CA, CVA (not CVD / CVP) in a BCH, etc. etc...

AKA: Koloth Kinshaya - Lord of the House Kinshaya in the Klingon Empire
S'Leth - Romulan Admiral
Some anonymous strongman in Prime Industries

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #117 on: April 07, 2005, 01:39:53 pm »
Um Julin, the BPV of stock fighters IS included in the 181 BPV of the CVD.

Regardless, I will nerf the fighters as long as none of the other admins or the coalition leasdership object.

Can sombody remember to bring this up before every server?   ;D
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


Offline TheJudge

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 5695
  • Gender: Male
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #118 on: April 07, 2005, 02:41:38 pm »
I'm sorry guys, but I've got better things to do with my time than to be nothing more than a shooting duck in the romulan shooting gallery.  At the best of times we match them 1 for 1, and most of the time they outnumber us too much to make it worth even bothering.  If it was real life, I'd be on the front lines to the bitter end, but it's a game. 

I enjoy all the banter and fun stuff that goes on with the game, which is why I waited until today, Thursday, before bowing out.  You might as well end the server now and give the roms a win for a well-played game and great job at recruiting because unless a sudden wave of ten or twelve federation/gorn players come online twenty-four hours a day for the next week, nothing's going to change. 

Enjoy and I hope to see y'all on a future server.


Edit:  Oh dammit!  How do you know you're a federation pilot?  Because hopeless causes appeal in the biggest way imaginable.  I just got done watching the DS9 episode where the Dominion handed the Odyssey its head on a platter and I feel the urge to get involved with another hopeless cause so I'll be back on the server, looking for some starbase or planet where I can still resupply before sacrificing another ship in the romulan duck gallery.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2005, 03:03:28 pm by TheJudge »
He who can master the data controls the world.

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: GW 5 Balance Issues
« Reply #119 on: April 07, 2005, 03:03:55 pm »
I'm sorry guys, but I've got better things to do with my time than to be nothing more than a shooting duck in the romulan shooting gallery.  At the best of times we match them 1 for 1, and most of the time they outnumber us too much to make it worth even bothering.  If it was real life, I'd be on the front lines to the bitter end, but it's a game. 

I enjoy all the banter and fun stuff that goes on with the game, which is why I waited until today, Thursday, before bowing out.  You might as well end the server now and give the roms a win for a well-played game and great job at recruiting because unless a sudden wave of ten or twelve federation/gorn players come online twenty-four hours a day for the next week, nothing's going to change. 

Enjoy and I hope to see y'all on a future server.



Let them hunt AI during the day, fly with us at night when it's still fun.

It's a game, not a job.   
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .