Des+? (Belts) v Abom (IC)

strike700 · Post by **strike700** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 5:49 pm

SilentRogue wrote:QUOTE (SilentRogue @ Jul 6 2006, 10:41 AM) By-the-by, I believe Belter's tech costs are more expensive than standard, it's only their techbases that are cheaper.

I could be wrong... not likely, but I could...

Thats right. however Noir halved the cost for tac research from whre belters used to be. The only problem with belt tac is that the defeacto money settings(high Higher Normal) Let them get a fully upped tech base and expand like crazy off just 3 sectors. You wnt to nerf Belts, try lowering the money settings some time.

Grimmwolf_GB · Post by **Grimmwolf_GB** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 6:51 pm

Lykourgos wrote:QUOTE (Lykourgos @ Jul 6 2006, 06:15 PM) First:

Technoflux 54%
Belters 52%
.
.
.
IC 42%
Phoenix 41%
Bios 40%

I don't even know where you got those numbers, Grimmwolf, they aren't accurate for any version of DN.

Well, I cannot give you better stats, I am sorry:
http://asgs.alleg.net/asgsnet/factionstats.aspx
THose are the stats for the last month:
Faction Win/Loss Statistics for 6/6/2006 to 7/6/2006

According to the main page. Yes, it looks horrible:

Belters 55%
Technoflux 55%
Rixian 54%
Gigacorp 48%
Dreghklar 46%
Ga'Taraan 45%
Iron Coalition 40%
Bios 36%
Phoenix 26%

I don't just fabricate numbers to make a point.

About the rest:
Ship tech is 25% more expensive, ships are 20% less expensive.

Post by **TheBored** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 6:58 pm

You were kidding, right Lyk? If you play for a couple hours you can see that those are accurate.

TB

Lykourgos · Post by **Lykourgos** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 7:41 pm

http://asgs.alleg.net/asgsnet/factionstats...01&core=dn%

There's the link I'm using... it's for the entire history, not just the last month.

Kopperhead · Post by **Kopperhead** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:47 pm

It was a tough game, both teams were that, teams, maybe not brilliant but we did what we could working with our fellows, not like 20 guys flying around pointlessly, thanks to all who played, I enjoyed it even if I was more time podded than in a ship.

That carriered bombruns were quite impressive too, very good game Abo and Des/Champy, thanks. /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

Grim_Reaper_4u · Post by **Grim_Reaper_4u** » Fri Jul 07, 2006 9:37 am

BTW like i mentioned before GT is even better than belts. Yesterday Dreamwalker commed a GT Tac game against some Ice.... whatever who played IC exp, where Ice had a heavy stack (it was on Planet with no Elo). We completely owned their int bombing attempts (in which they used lotsa PP and heaps of nans) . They managed to kill our 1st tac but we soon had another tac up and advanced it and then the game was over for them. They couldn't even kill our Tac (which was only 3k from the hole) with a whole team effort due to our LRM3's.

If anything is broken then it's Tac not Belt Tac. Personally I think GT needs nerfing a lot more than Belt, Belt is OK (and ffs don't look at win %, look at whether GOOD comms can consistently win with a faction, idiot voob comms that would lose a game even with a stack only skew the results /mrgreen.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="mrgreen.gif" /> ) Faction win % don't mean anything unless you look at who wins and who loses. If Night wins a game with Belts vs a Noob with 14 numbers on his team who plays Nix does this really mean that belts is better than nix?

Post by **Raveen** » Fri Jul 07, 2006 10:25 am

Tac is a perenial problem in Alleg balancing. The problem lies in the fact that it's substantially more tricky to fly well than Sup or Exp which have essentially point and click ships. This means that a noob/voob will be better off with a team that chooses Exp or Sup as primary tech as they can handle the ships moderately well as opposed to Tac where they will get badly beaten because they can't use the ships well. This leads to Tac getting perked to compensate.

However, give a good team of experienced vets (teams like this are rare, but they do happen) Tac and they will pwn because the tech is good, but only if you know how to use it.

The solution would be to strip back alleg and rebuild the techpaths from the ground up but that'd cause a whole load more problems than it'd solve.

Grim_Reaper_4u · Post by **Grim_Reaper_4u** » Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:25 pm

Raveen wrote:QUOTE (Raveen @ Jul 7 2006, 12:25 PM) However, give a good team of experienced vets (teams like this are rare, but they do happen) Tac and they will pwn because the tech is good, but only if you know how to use it.

Correct : Serebrone, Rock and me got 70% of our teams kills while defending in that GT vs IC game.
A few of the "smart" comments of noobs/voobs during that game and other Tac games:

- "man i want ss3 for my SF"
- "need better weapons" when we had a fully upped Tac /blink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":o" border="0" alt="blink.gif" />
- GrimR:"drop your shields when you fly in a sf" Noob:"wtf for" GrimR:"So the enemy can't see you when you lob missiles at them" Noob:"but he will kill me fast when he shoots at me" GrimR:"if he can't $#@!ing see you, he can't kill you" /doh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":doh:" border="0" alt="doh.gif" />
- "man these SF suck for dogfighting" /wacko.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":wacko:" border="0" alt="wacko.gif" />
- Vets: "defend in adv. SF not in basic figs FFS" half the team: "Why?" /sad.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":sad:" border="0" alt="sad.gif" />

Tac needs a nerf and pilot's brains need a boost /mrgreen.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="mrgreen.gif" /> The problem with Tac is that you really need cm3 in order to survive but cm3 costs the same as a very nice tech base and it can only be used just for defensive purposes. It's a bit ridiculous that you need a starbase to defend against tac. Essentially you need an exp for pp and a starbase for cm3 to adequately defend against Tac (alternatively you can use carriers quite effectively against tac but that's another story /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" /> ) Problem is that your miners will be dead waaay before you get a starbase and some nice tech, so the only option you have is bomb rush the bastards (preferably with carrier support). However most peeps don't want to bomb rush and rush ints or enh figs and thus the window to kill Tac is gone because by the time that most comms buy bombers the other team has lrm3 adv sf and bombing takes a @#(!load of skill from that point onward.

jgbaxter · Post by **jgbaxter** » Fri Jul 07, 2006 4:48 pm

Lyk, you seem confused.

[quote=""Lyk link"]Core: dn_000445
Faction Wins Losses Draws Win %
Technoflux 218 175 5 54%
Belters 350 306 13 52%
Gigacorp 364 329 19 51%
Ga'Taraan 198 192 5 50%
Dreghklar 315 330 4 48%
Rixian 134 151 7 45%
Iron Coalition 252 332 7 42%
Phoenix 68 86 8 41%
Bios 71 102 4 40%[/quote]

[quote=""Grim link last month"]Core: dn_000445
Faction Wins Losses Draws Win

Belters 98 74 5 55%
Rixian 48 38 1 55%
Technoflux 71 52 4 55%
Gigacorp 89 93 4 47%
Dreghklar 65 74 0 46%
Ga'Taraan 46 52 0 46%
Iron Coalition 62 86 1 41%
Bios 14 25 1 35%
Phoenix 6 17 4 22%[/quote]

You're using different links, yes, it apparently doesn't matter as both links prove you wrong. /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />

Still, you're right, people should look at total stats for a larger pool, however seeing trends is also important.

We're all eagerly awaiting the next version, with some Bios perks which Noir is quiet about (more discussion in the forums if you like openness hehe), and maybe some Belt/Giga whaco on heads. A b-zillion new factions (which I hope is only going to be released 1-2 at a time, but that's prolly just me). /mrgreen.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="mrgreen.gif" />

Lykourgos · Post by **Lykourgos** » Fri Jul 07, 2006 5:26 pm

Proves me wrong how? Those were exactly the numbers that I quoted.