Register / Log in

Server Costs Oct

Ends in 11 days 0%
It is currently Sun Oct 21, 2018 1:04 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 104 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: balance stats
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 9:19 pm 
Developer

Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:29 am
Posts: 2232
Location: the steel city
Offline
take a look here: http://skyrates.net/statsSheet/

it seems to not render for everyone, i don't know why. i'm trying to cook up a homebrew solution or modify the existing html so you can all see it. if some other noble soul wants to put the data elsewhere instead, that would be much appreciated.

range is unfinished, i'm working on a new draft of the refueling layout now.

cost is undone, i want to see what happens in the next day or two economically.

i'm considering a raise to the CKph of the performance line overall.

these stats, if/when approved (at dev discretion with your input, as always) should be expected to change when upgrades come online. at that time, the stock and upgrade lines will be differentiated in cost and upgradability.

-PL-


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 11:12 pm 

Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 425
Faction: Flight School
Offline
Doesn't render for me (Firefox), but some very useful graphs.

I don't suppose it's possible to leave out a data point? And have the S/U planes only drawn in from tier 3+? Not that it matters much. It's easy to figure out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:22 am 

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 2:09 pm
Posts: 243
Faction: Flight School
Offline
Renders fine for me in Firefox 3.0.5 (Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.0.5) Gecko/2008120122 Firefox/3.0.5)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:27 am 

Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:19 am
Posts: 84
Faction: Flight School
Offline
For me at least, adblock filtering was causing the content to not load until I noticed and whitelisted. So that may be the same cause for others facing a blank page.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:19 am 

Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 425
Faction: Flight School
Offline
I can confirm that this was also the problem for me.
After whitelisting with adblock, all is well.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:45 am 

Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 6:23 pm
Posts: 105
Faction: Flight School
Offline
For the most part they look a lot better.

--performance--
Since maneuver no longer effects dodge rate I think the perf planes advantage in maneuver is a bit low.

I don't think perf planes as a whole need more ckph, there are however exceptions.

The Mantis and Cetacea are the two biggest ones with the Requin tagging along. By biggest I mean the sprites, the mantis and ceta are huge by perf craft standards and the requin is kind of large. These planes don't really belong in the perf line at all but as they are apparently stuck there for this round we better do something with them.

With their large sizes the avoidance combat style used with the smaller perf planes just won't work at all. They therefore need something else to makeup for this. Better ckph than the s/u planes but less then the trade planes is an option here.

--trade--
I think the bullfrog, lancaster, and kingfisher could use some more armor. The armor amounts of 11, 11, and 12 respectively seem awfully low in comparison to other planes of their tiers.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 2:45 am 
Dev Eyepatch

Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2008 3:32 am
Posts: 1040
Faction: Flight School
Offline
I like these stats, though I'd still say that the Bismarck needs either more speed (at the cost of cargo) or more Dakka. It just seems a bit underpowered now with 3L's (Only two of which swivel) while a lower tier blimp (Levi) has 10 M's. (All of which swivel)

Maybe one or two additional M's offset of the front L ? (Like the Vengeance's front weapon set-up if one M)

Other than that, I basically agree with above statements.

_________________
Sometimes I do what I want to do. The rest of the time, I do what I have to. What we do in life, echoes in eternity.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 6:33 am 
Legend

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:51 am
Posts: 1481
Location: Cynoscephalae
Faction: Court of Violets

Offline
I first wanted to highlight that the Inger's top speed is down to 1,000, which should drop its corner velocity to combatable rates.

Also, agreed with the previous posters, these appear to be figured prior to the new armor/silhouette system. A few thoughts on that here: http://skyrates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5642


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 7:01 am 

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:57 am
Posts: 511
Location: Playing with The Mechanic
Faction: Flight School
Offline
The performance planes don't really seem to have any advantages now; they're equivalent CKPH to the combatters, so their earning source will have to be the same as the combat planes (mostly combat with trading as a supplement). However, the combat line ends up with TWICE as much armor as the perfs, which in itself is a huge advantage, but considering the new Damage Reduction stat will make them overpoweringly better to fight in.

In contrast to this, the perfs have maybe 1 or 2 more points in Maneuver across the line. Since maneuver doesn't affect dodge anymore, this really won't make their turn performance noticeably better, so it seems they'd suck in combat. What we're possibly not seeing is the Silhouette stat which is (judging by how hard they are to hit in combat now) probably much higher on the perf line - which probably compensates for DR to some extent. Still, unless we know the base accuracy numbers, the silhouette numbers, and how the two interact to determine hit chances, it's going to be impossible to make an informed judgment here.

This brings up a point I've been meaning to raise: What exactly is the purpose / perceived benefit to hiding relevant combat stats from players? More information in our hands (like exact stat values for accuracy and silhouette, and how the math for dodge and damage reduction works) simply allows us as players to make better decisions - we'll be trying to figure this stuff out anyway, but trying to do that by observation and statistics is tedious and frustrating, not fun.

Of course, min-maxers and math geeks will try to use the math to figure out optimal configurations and such, but that part is fun. And allowing us to do that will make it much easier for you as developers to notice things that are possibly too powerful or weak relative to other options, and nerf/buff them accordingly. Let us have the math, and we'll do half your balance work for you... the ideal end state will be one where everything is balanced enough that there isn't any more "single best solution" - might be a bit hard to reach that point but imo it's a much better place to be than "there is a theoretical optimum, but nobody can find it because they don't know the math" - that's just annoying.

_________________
Wing Commander Valarauka of the Crimson Armada
Post Aviation, Engineering Division


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 7:25 am 
Developer

Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:29 am
Posts: 2232
Location: the steel city
Offline
that part above, where i said i'm "considering raising the CKph of perf planes," add the word "strongly," val.

-PL-


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 7:58 am 

Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 2:01 pm
Posts: 112
Faction: Flight School
Offline
Combat armor (apart from blimps) is almost certainly too high there with the addtiion of DR. Blimp armor needs a boost given their total inability to dodge - they die far too easily right now.

Perf manoeuvre may be slightly too low, although it's hard to tell with silhouette this early. A ckph boost would make sense - even if you reduce combat armor from where they are in the sheet, Combat planes are going to be nicely stronger at combat, so shading perf towards combat/trade would be sensible.

I like that traders now have a real ckph advantage over the rest of the planes. For ckph in general, I think all planes need a boost at the lower levels over the stat sheet with the economy changes - this may result in a similar boost to the higher level planes to keep the separation intact, but while giving trade a real advantage here is good we don't want to nerf the lower level planes here (apart from the chappy).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:38 am 

Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 7:56 pm
Posts: 74
Faction: Flight School
Offline
Putting in a plea not to nerf the bolo quite so much, especially with regards to speed. Bunches of skyrates (including me) have invested in them recently because, given the information we had, they were clearly the best plane available at the tier. I got one to run influence, but now the speed reduction is going to make that tough, and I'm a long ways away from my next plane.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:02 am 
Explorer

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:33 pm
Posts: 1760
Location: Pacific Standard Time
Faction: Flight School
Offline
I'm a bit worried that tiers 5 and 6 have no real options for the speed freaks. The Mantis is slightly less disappointing with 6 Maneuver, but both the Mantis and the Cetacea suffer from serious sprite size issues. Now that sprite size grants damage avoidance, this is a major shortcoming for both planes. Unfortunately, we can't see from these stats whether or not their silhouettes are destined to change.

If they remain the same size, both planes will need a boost to armor to become viable in combat.

-c.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 11:06 am 

Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:30 am
Posts: 126
Faction: Flight School
Offline
Personally I think that the performance planes need to be faster than in this revision, the map is huge, even the inger would take 12 hours to get from one end to the other at 1000kph. Its ckph is also not that incredible, and suffers terribly from having to wait at an island for the price to drop, wheras something like the levi doesn't at all.

Of course the cargo and many perf planes now suffer from blowing up anytime anything gets closer to them so its kind of insane to see them getting even bigger cargo hold sizes. I can't wait to hear the cry of horror when some levi pilot comes back after lunch to find he lost 300t of cargo.... I think levi pilots are going to need an 'auto-bribe' feature cuz they certainly won't be able to flee from combat at those speeds, hah!

Meanwhile the combat planes just keep getting better, the Spectre was already king of the skies and so it will remain. Combat wise you can make 100kG/h leaving it on AR in blackland; the ckph numbers you are increasing but that's useless since none of the skylands can handle that amount of cargo so good luck with the queue. the perf planes are getting even slower which means they make even less money off the speed missions that are to their advantage, and make it a whole lot less fun to zoom around the map. especially when the combat speed in 2 teirs is about the same so you're not really going faster than anyone (perf planes need to be about twice as fast as combat planes IMO - their problem is the AI, not the speed, nerf their speed in combat if you have to but not on the map).

You really need to have silhouette and range on these charts because that's basically the two most important things in skyrates right now.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:50 pm 

Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 384
Faction: Flight School
Offline
Quick thoughts:

1. Ckph for perf planes is too low, as you say. Especially at the lower tiers. At the top tiers, at least they have influence advantages, and have allow fast, fun exploration.

2. Dauntless and Seafire both look too good. Higher ckph than all but the traders, and still good combat stats.

3. Given that trade is making much more money that combat, traders look too good in general, for those who can abide the painful slowness. However, I'd suggest rebalancing the combat/trade profits in the future, rather than mucking with ckph stats.

4. What does "cost is undone" mean? How will price changes be handled? Should I quit hiding gold under my mattress, and invest in a plane, hoping that its value is about to double?

5. Disagree that perf is too slow. Crossing the map was too fast last round, with kits.

6. Would it be useful for people to list which planes they would choose under these stats, so we could see if there's a real goat among them? I'd go:

Nomad, Kittyhawk, Chappy, Loki, Dauntless, Bolo, Seafire, Nova, Inger.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 1:49 am 

Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 6:23 pm
Posts: 105
Faction: Flight School
Offline
After looking at the stats more closely, Providance does have a point.
While perf planes themselves don't have to be faster, they do need more of an advantage over the other planes.

In most cases the combat and s/u two to three tiers up is just as fast as you are. With the increased speeds, maneuver, and accel of the other types I think they are pushing too far on the perf planes niche.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 1:05 pm 

Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 3:02 pm
Posts: 673
Faction: Flight School
Offline
Giaconda wrote:
Putting in a plea not to nerf the bolo quite so much, especially with regards to speed. Bunches of skyrates (including me) have invested in them recently because, given the information we had, they were clearly the best plane available at the tier. I got one to run influence, but now the speed reduction is going to make that tough, and I'm a long ways away from my next plane.


While unfortunate, it's necessary. The Bolo was pretty overpowered last round and there was a lot of talk about nerfing it. Many arguments against nerfing the plane boiled down to 'don't nerf it because I bought one'.

Better to fix it now, early in the round, than to wait until later when the impact is greater. Besides, the stats phil provided fit right into his progression. He was aiming for balance and he hit it pretty solidly with the Bolo.

I agree with Val that perf planes are getting the short end of the stick, but if the CKPH is gonna get tweaked it might fix that.

_________________
Former Flight School Faculty
Failed Incarnation of Speech
Nihil aliud scit necessitas quam vincere.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 1:10 pm 
Explorer

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:33 pm
Posts: 1760
Location: Pacific Standard Time
Faction: Flight School
Offline
Sildar wrote:
While unfortunate, it's necessary. The Bolo was pretty overpowered last round and there was a lot of talk about nerfing it. Many arguments against nerfing the plane boiled down to 'don't nerf it because I bought one'.

Better to fix it now, early in the round, than to wait until later when the impact is greater. Besides, the stats phil provided fit right into his progression. He was aiming for balance and he hit it pretty solidly with the Bolo.

I agree with Val that perf planes are getting the short end of the stick, but if the CKPH is gonna get tweaked it might fix that.


I agree with you, Sildar. In fact, I would pick the Bolo post-nerf, because the Ceta is still underpowered because of its silhouette.

-c.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 8:21 am 

Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 7:56 pm
Posts: 74
Faction: Flight School
Offline
Agree with previous posters that Levis are too easy to beat right now and need some more armor. I am slightly concerned that the amount of armor on higher-tier combat planes combined with their new damage resistance will make combats take too long (20 Armor on the Thunderbolt!), which makes the game less sporadic. This is a downside for me, since I like slipping a couple of rounds of combat in among my other activities.

Are crew slots slated to change at all? I don't see these listed on the stat sheet. I wouldn't mind seeing more crew slots on the higher tier planes, since the game is now designed to have multiples of the same crew type for maximum effectiveness.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 2:11 pm 

Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 12:53 pm
Posts: 549
Faction: Flight School
Offline
If you're looking for something extra to give performance planes, I suggest lower stall speed. In combat, performance planes' edge is their ability to outmaneuver their opponents so as to have optimal positioning; this is particularly important since they tend to have small arc coverage. Lowering their stall speed both makes them better at their core competency (yay, businesstalk) and gives them a trait that is distinctly theirs.

A stat rebalance like this would be the perfect time to set plane resale value back to 90%, which, as I've explained elsewhere, is plain good game design.

Stat sheet works fine for me using Opera 10 Alpha.
Edit: fixed formatting


Last edited by Istatay on Mon Jan 05, 2009 6:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 104 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group