Federation Commander

mojo jojo · Lieutenant Commander Joined: 23 Jun 2009 Posts: 340

I never liked just giving victory points for point differences between tournament fleets. I'm not convinced the free points are enough.

My thought is that instead of free VP, the fleet with more points simply starts the game with shield damage equal to 3 times the difference in points. So a 445 pt fleet vs a 435 pt fleet would have to take 30 shield boxes damage before the fight starts. The owner of the higher point fleet can spread the damage however he/she chooses amongst all the ships in the fleet.

Andros would be a little different if they were the higher point fleet since their panels clear so easily. Instead, they will take 1 hull box damage per point difference that cannot be repaired turn 1. So an Andro fleet that's 10 pts higher would take 10 hull boxes damage before the fight starts, and those 10 boxes cannot be repaired turn 1. Again, he can choose whichever ships he wants to take the hull damage.

Thoughts?

pinecone · Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 6:52 pm Post subject:

I'd say that that would just lead to trouble. Someone could purposely take a bunch of small ships to leave the opponent with no shields.

If you don't think the VP difference is enough, then max out the number of BPV you are allowed to use.

mojo jojo · Lieutenant Commander Joined: 23 Jun 2009 Posts: 340

You can only do that to a limited extent since fleets must be between 425-450 pts and there must be 3-4 ships.

Scoutdad · Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 8:38 pm Post subject:

While it sounds intriguing... I can see a whole new series of Command NOtes espousing various vviews on the most advantageous way to allocate the requisite damage... I think we should leave well enough alone for the first tourney.

None of us have ever tried this before, so lets keep it as vanilla as possible. If the first tourney works well, then we can discuss modifying the format for future versions.
_________________
Commander, Battlegroup Murfreesboro
Department Head, ACTASF

ericphillips · Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:04 pm Post subject:

Agreed ScoutDad. No time for this time. I am ready to rumble.

As for the idea, I don't like having pre-damage (unless in a scenario). However, I wouldn't mind giving advantages to smaller ships, like a legendary officer, or extra free HET, or higher repair, or something, based on point differential. But it would take a lot of thinking, and the current system seems to work okay.
_________________
"I could have been an adventurer like you, but I took an arrow to the knee."

phul · Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:56 am Post subject:

Referring to the original post:
This is an interesting post to me, since I've always looked at the VP system and thought that it favored the smaller fleet (in points). The system as it stands now puts the onus on the larger fleet to inflict more damage (and not in boxes, but in milestones) than the smaller fleet. And since, even in a 425 vs. 450 engagement, you're only talking about a 5.5% difference in BPV. In cases where the match up is only a few points difference, and you're talking about a difference in the sub percentile, in a tourney setting it forces the 'larger' fleet to be the aggressor. Regardless of if in that match up that fleet is suited to being the aggressive one.

Unless I'm not looking at the right set of rules for the tourney?

ericphillips · Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:19 am Post subject:

phul · Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:46 am Post subject:

ericphillips · Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:57 am Post subject:

Phul:

So you are saying that in a 449 (fleet A) to 450 (fleet B) battle, fleet A starts with 1 VP at the beginning because of point differences. If each got one internal on all three opponents ships, the score would be:

Fleet A: 46 vp
Fleet B: 45 vp

You are right. Even with one point difference in fleet size, fleet B needs to get one level better than the lower BPV fleet.

Interesting.
_________________
"I could have been an adventurer like you, but I took an arrow to the knee."

mojo jojo · Lieutenant Commander Joined: 23 Jun 2009 Posts: 340

Then why do most people seem to pick fleets as close to the point limit as possible? Why don't we consistently see fleets at 425-430 instead of 440-450 for the most part?

The answer is obviously that points matter. The bigger fleet is more capable in general than the smaller fleet. A 25 pt difference in fleets can downgrade a CW/CL to a DD or a CA to a CL. That's a significant difference.

Yes it's possible to game the system if you knew exactly the point total of the opposing fleet beforehand and then select a 1 pt smaller fleet, but since tournament fleets are picked sight unseen, that shouldn't be possible.

I would happily play a 450 pt fleet vs a 425 pt fleet sight unseen even if I have to inflict more damage.

phul · Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 7:34 am Post subject:

terryoc · Captain Joined: 07 Oct 2006 Posts: 1386

Actually, under the tournament rules if one player scored 45 points and one player scored 46 points, it's probably a draw. At least at Origins, I think you need to score at least 30 points per hour played so if one player does not score at least 120 points over the four hours, the game is scored as a draw, not a win. You will really need to go for ship kills to gain victory.

Edit: This is wrong, there must be a 30 point difference minimum, and the winner must have scored at least 150 points.

This point is of interest to me because I'm running a tournament right now, but I'm not yet convinced that it's a problem. If, after a significant number of tournament matches are played, we see a definite bias towards smaller squadrons, then I'll gather the evidence and send it to SVC and the Federation Commander staff for evaluation.
_________________
"Captain" Terry O'Carroll, fourteen papers published including six best of issue
"Man, Terry, you are like a loophole seeking missle!" - Mike West

terryoc · Captain Joined: 07 Oct 2006 Posts: 1386

Thinking some more, if for example we have a 425-point squadron facing off against a 450 point squadron, the smaller squadron scores a 25 point bonus straight off. That means, to win, he must score at least 125 more points, and keep the opponent from scoring within 30 points of his own score. I don't see how he can score 125 points by merely damaging ships, he must at least cripple a dreadnought/heavy battlecruiser or blow up a small one, or cripple two cruisers.

25 points is the difference between a CA and a CW, or a DW and a frigate. While the CA (or NCA) may not have significantly more firepower than the CW/CL, it IS harder to kill (the increased stuffing and larger warp engines does make a difference in my experience) so it's harder to score points on. In the comparison between DW and FF the difference is even more dramatic (100 points vs around 75).
_________________
"Captain" Terry O'Carroll, fourteen papers published including six best of issue
"Man, Terry, you are like a loophole seeking missle!" - Mike West

mojo jojo · Lieutenant Commander Joined: 23 Jun 2009 Posts: 340

storeylf · Fleet Captain Joined: 24 Jul 2008 Posts: 1897

We've played a lot of games under the previous tourney rules (where there was no 30 pt requirement) and to echo what some else said, the smaller fleet has a distinct advantage. It starts with points on the door, and on average is giving up less points per damage/cripple/kill. Indeed just a fortnight ago in a tourney style game (Selt vs Klink) my fleet was 3 points less than the other guy, All the ships ended damaged for 10%, so I was 0.3 ahead, plus the 3 difference = 3.3 pts victory.

Whilst I can't speak for others, I do not try and get as close to the 450 as possible, I would prefer to get as close to 425 as reasonably possible, not that I'm overly bothered if I end up at 450. The maths of choosing 3-4 ships can make it hard to get close to 425, some races are harder than others , and you just have to go for what looks like a good squadron that fits in the point bracket.

To go with that other thread we were debating, I'd far rather take 2 Mohawks + 2 Mongols + 1 stinger (432) rather than 2 Mohawks + 2 Rangers (444). Not only do I actually prefer the mongols it also works out a further 12 cheaper, and therefore more likely to give me a points advantage.