"Gamey" tactics like "Rock, none" races

[spoon]

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:


No, they aren't. Have you tried?

Yes. Increase things that are too low. Lower things that are too high. Test. Repeat.

It is the "test" that takes time, and he has people that test for him...

Compare the 10 points in maitance to 10 points in, say, Minerals.

what about Repair, Resistance, Strength, Organics, etc? Maint. Reduction is at least in the top 3 most important characteristics, and it's cost should be weighted to reflect that (or maint reduction should be made to work differently). Or are you going to tell me that 10 points is maint reduction is equivalent to, say 50 points in Tolerance, or 50 points in Repair?

[Phoenix-D]

"Yes. Increase things that are too low. Lower things that are too high. Test. Repeat"

Ever notice how people disagree on which is which, and how it needs to be fixed either way?

"Maint. Reduction is at least in the top 3 most important characteristics, and it's cost should be weighted to reflect that (or maint reduction should be made to work differently)."

No, it shouldn't. IIRC it already costs more, and it's a reduction in -maintaince-. That doesn't directly correlate to production, mainly because there are other things production can be used for.

"Or are you going to tell me that 10 points is maint reduction is equivalent to, say 50 points in Tolerance, or 50 points in Repair?"

Tolerance is a -weird- trait. I'm not claiming that everything is perfectly balanced, but it isn't quite as simple as you think either. Used to be that the main balance complaint was about the APB, not the PPB.

Phoenix-D

[spoon]

They are balance issues in your opinion. In the opinion of others they aren't.

Who is claiming there aren't balance issues? I think there is agreement there. What those balance issues are, and how significant they are, and how difficult it is to fix them, are, I think, the topics of debate.
If there is someone who claims the game is balanced, please compare:
Mechanoid Race Vs Advanced Storage (each cost 1000 points)
Repair vs Maint Reduction
Torpedoes vs. DUCs or PPBs.

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by spoon:
[/qb]

what about Repair, Resistance, Strength, Organics, etc? Maint. Reduction is at least in the top 3 most important characteristics, and it's cost should be weighted to reflect that (or maint reduction should be made to work differently). Or are you going to tell me that 10 points is maint reduction is equivalent to, say 50 points in Tolerance, or 50 points in Repair?[/QB][/quote]
120 maintenance aptitude costs 2500 points, which makes it the single most expensive trait there is.
That's the equal of 140 in just about every other Category other than aggressiveness and defensiveness. Personally, I'd much rather have 140 construction than 120 maintenance, because your ships don't Last that long in a way anyways.

The game should not be perfectly balanced, because then it becomes nothing more than a paper/rock/scissors matchup. That reduces all strategic decisions to the point where your ability as a player no longer matters. All that matters is that you play the game, because every decision is just as good as every other decision.

[PvK]

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
...

The game should not be perfectly balanced, because then it becomes nothing more than a paper/rock/scissors matchup. That reduces all strategic decisions to the point where your ability as a player no longer matters. All that matters is that you play the game, because every decision is just as good as every other decision.

No.

Rock/Paper/Scissors is IMO a really bad term to express the idea that every tactic should have some sort of counter-tactic. I say this because Rock/Paper/Scissors is so pointless that IMO I almost wouldn't even call it a game. It's only about trying to intuit your opponent's pattern. It seems like this term is causing some real confusion, because here for instance you are equating "balance" with the pointlessness of rock/paper/scissors.

At its best, SE4 is about offering an extremely wide range of options, and a logic for how they interact. Players are free to develop interesting and novel strategies, and then to meet, observe, and try to counteract enemy strategies in ways that make sense. The more options available, the more they make sense, and are useful and viable, the more interesting the game. When some options tend to be the best in all circumstances, or some options are almost always inferior, the game becomes less interesting.

PvK

[Phoenix-D]

"Who is claiming there aren't balance issues? I think there is agreement there. What those balance issues are, and how significant they are, and how difficult it is to fix them, are, I think, the topics of debate."

Thank you for repeating my point.

"If there is someone who claims the game is balanced, please compare:
Mechanoid Race Vs Advanced Storage (each cost 1000 points)"

This would depend on how often your opponent uses plague bombs! (or how high your random events are) Mechanoids is a very specialized trait.

"Repair vs Maint Reduction"

The only issue here is the weakness of armor in the standard game, combined with the lethality of fleet vs fleet action. In other words you don't often have much to repair! (see minerals vs organics..). Repair is MUCH less expensive than maintance reduction.

"Torpedoes vs. DUCs or PPBs."

Torps, at max:
1.25 damage/ton/turn
DUC V:
1.33 damage/ton/turn

Torps have the first-strike advantage, DUCs have a better damage over time (slightly). DUCs are cheaper to research since it requires half as many levels to get there (the initial mil sci is irrelevent because 99/100 you want that anyway). Torps have a longer range with no damage falloff. Neither has a to-hit bonus.

Cost is about the same, per ton, with the torps costing more radiactives.

Phoenix-D

[Zarix]

I don't see any problem with maintenance. It helps a lot in long games but in short ones it is totally useless. For example if you meet a race with high maintenance reduction it only means that you have to attack fast so the race doesn't have time to benefit from the low maintenance cost.

The balance problems aren't an issue to me. There has to be some bad tactics and some good ones. If the game were in perfect balance it would be much less interesting.