The EXP problem

Lykourgos · Post by **Lykourgos** » Mon May 05, 2008 7:25 pm

I don't know what $#@!ing SGs you guys have been playing, but XT goes tac and sup at least 50% of the time. Exp is used a little bit, more, yes, because it fits our style. Exp has by far the weakest endgame tech and is not the best at killing miners, nor at bomber D. I really don't know what this universal urge to nerf ints is from.

Again, nerfing ints is roughly the dumbest thing that could be done to the community core. The idea is to start with small, non-controversial changes from DN so that people will play the $#@!ing core. When we have solid data from SGs concerning tech path imbalance, then we can talk about nerfing ints. In the meantime I recommend we make figs slightly more fun to fly and leave it at that.

Paradigm2 · Post by **Paradigm2** » Mon May 05, 2008 7:34 pm

Lets look at XT's own records of games vs. squads with similar winning records as of late in which at least one team used expansion (PK, Sysx, ACE):

2008:

PK - January 20th Core: DN
Virulence(Dreg:AdvExp,DryDock,HE Mines) vs Aarmstrong(IC:AdvExp,AdvTac,Sup)

Vir(Rix:AdvExp) vs. Aarmstrong IC:AdvExp,AdvTac,SY?)
[Med/MedHigh/Normal/Normal/SY:On/InsideOut:Small] - PK Wins (Well Played PK)

Ozzy(IC:AdvExp,Tac,Sup,SY) vs Spidey(IC:AdvExp) [Med/Med/Normal/Normal/SY:On/HiHigher:Small]- XT wins

2007:

SysX - November 18th Core: DN
Ozzy(Rix:AdvExp) vs Spidey(Dreg:Gar) [Med/MedHi/Normal/Normal/SY:On/HiHigher:Small]- XT wins

SysX - November 11th Core: DN
Virulence(Phoenix:Exp/AdvTac/Sup/Trans) vs Spidey(Phoenix:AdvSup) [Med/Med/Normal/Normal/SY:On/Star:Small]- XT wins

# PK - October 7th Core: DN -
Tournament Championship
Nak(IC:Exp) vs Aarmstrong(IC:Exp) [Low/MedLow/Normal/SY:On/HiHigher]- XT wins

PK - September 23th Core: DN - Tournament Finals
Nak(IC:Exp/Sup) vs Aarmstrong(IC:Exp) [Low/MedLow/Normal/SY:On/InsideOut]- XT wins

ACE - August 26th Core: DN - Tournament Finals
Ozzy(GT:Exp/Res) vs Paradigm(GT:Exp/Res) [Med/Med/Normal/SY:On/Star]- XT wins

ACE - July 8th Core: DN - Tournament
Bacon(Bios:Sup) vs. McWarren (IC:Exp) [?] - ACE Wins
Psychosis(GT:Exp) vs. Paradigm (IC:Exp/SY) [?]- ACE Wins

I could go further, but I see a trend of the winning team using Expansion. Not to mention, I hardly see any 50% usage of tac and sup.

Any other misinformation?

mcwarren4 · Post by **mcwarren4** » Mon May 05, 2008 7:46 pm

Broodwich wrote:QUOTE (Broodwich @ May 5 2008, 03:15 PM) The biggest reason that ints are most effective at killing miners is because the $#@!ING HE3 BUG. God damnit you can sit in base and watch the he3 dropping 2 sectors away with no probes in it, designate the rock, then boost there in about 30 seconds. STOP (mcw added)

That's the problem... not the he3 bug... the part about being able to boost there in 30 seconds and circle boosting around a miner so that your lone int can kill the nan, then the miner, while evading fire, and still have fuel to boost home.

Lykourgos wrote:QUOTE (Lykourgos @ May 5 2008, 03:25 PM) I don't know what $#@!ing SGs you guys have been playing, but XT goes tac and sup at least 50% of the time. Exp is used a little bit, more, yes, because it fits our style. Exp has by far the weakest endgame tech and is not the best at killing miners, nor at bomber D. I really don't know what this universal urge to nerf ints is from.

Again, nerfing ints is roughly the dumbest thing that could be done to the community core. The idea is to start with small, non-controversial changes from DN so that people will play the $#@!ing core. When we have solid data from SGs concerning tech path imbalance, then we can talk about nerfing ints. In the meantime I recommend we make figs slightly more fun to fly and leave it at that.

Dude, you must have blinders on. I think XT has gone not exp against us in only two games in our entire history and one of those times was when settings made going exp all but impossible (when void chose east-west map in the squad doubles tournament). Sure XT might go tac or sup against squads that they expect to beat without much trouble as a means for experimenting but not if they know they need to win. Same goes for ACE as well. Going sup or tac vs similarly skilled squads is suicide.

edit - damn you Para! Damn you to hell!

edit squared - No this has nothing to do with the game this weekend against PK/SRM, I have been saying this for two years now.

Post by **TheBored** » Mon May 05, 2008 7:50 pm

I disagree with Para's solution because it removes Exp as an option. Mess with the prices that way its not a question of "Can I win with ints" its "Can I afford the ints". Nerf the scan range a bit and require scouts to be around. Mess with the fuel and you are ensuring that Exp will be unable to kill miners.

TB

Paradigm2 · Post by **Paradigm2** » Mon May 05, 2008 7:58 pm

It would change the way you play with Expansion, it would not make them unable or uneffective.

Here's a novel idea, maybe expansion shouldn't be able to kill miners easily.

However, even with fuel nerfs, you can still push your cons into choke points, mining sectors, etc. and completely disrupt their economy even if you have more trouble destroying them. Even if you HALVED fuel capacity (which would never happen) ints could still easily boost into an adjacent sector and kill their miners... you would just have more trouble going MULTIPLE sectors.

It would force you to play expansion as a tech path that is forced to expand into enemy territory and assert your authority over the enemy. If you want to kill miners from afar, go tac.

Edit: It would also encourage more tactics using friendly scouts (carrying fuel) or even carriers with your ints.

Kltplzyxm · Post by **Kltplzyxm** » Mon May 05, 2008 7:58 pm

TheBored wrote:QUOTE (TheBored @ May 5 2008, 12:50 PM) Mess with the fuel and you are ensuring that Exp will be unable to kill miners quickly.

Fixed it for you.

The whole point is to hinder them. Look, ints can still kill miners, it just takes more effort, patience, and teamwork. Nowhere does he say that it's impossible for ints to kill miners. Being able to boost home after killing a miner next door is just stupid. Again, ints do SFs job faster and better.

EDIT: DAMN YOU PARA!! DAMN YOU TO HELL! /mad.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":mad:" border="0" alt="mad.gif" />

Deja vue?

Paradigm2 · Post by **Paradigm2** » Mon May 05, 2008 7:59 pm

OK, i'm going to take a cumulative final, so i won't be able to press refresh anymore... unfortunately i'm probably going to do bad on the test because of this topic.

Youngmoose · Post by **Youngmoose** » Mon May 05, 2008 8:07 pm

Why not nerf minguns vs. utility?

madpeople · Post by **madpeople** » Mon May 05, 2008 8:23 pm

ammount of fuel hvy ints have

Bios: 19
Belters: 18
TF: 18
everyone else: 15
Lxy int: 10

now how many people actually notice the lxy int's lack of fuel?

it still manages to get places just as well as normal ints, ok it can rip out, but people often boost away, or boost through the 20 sec rip time..

i think you could probably lower all int's fuel by 5 or 7 and quite a few people won't even notice it.

other note, all adv figs have 3 less fuels than ints.

Kltplzyxm · Post by **Kltplzyxm** » Mon May 05, 2008 8:24 pm

Then ints will have a really hard time killing cons.