Welcome to GameHourz.com!
FAQFAQ   SearchSearch      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in

EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a

 
Goto page 1, 2, 3
   Game Forums (Home) -> VGA Planets 4 RSS
Related Topics:
Robot working in labor mines - The Birdmn player tell me that his robot prisoneer have work in his labor mine for all the game, the host was 196, and the game has now ended, the game was Hero or Sidekick hosted at drewhead. This is either a bug, or something extremly important missing

Now Host 197 - A new host has been released: What is new in Host.exe Version 4.000.197 Fixed: Virgo's Unicom never turns on. Fixed: Ships not becoming fearful when shields are low as designed New: You get planet stress messages at least one turn before the planet..

List of host changes - Is there a current webpage out there with all of the host changes to date? I can never remember em... I think one used to be on the wiki but it seems to be a dead link now... Would be great to put back on the wiki. GK

Host 199 surprise - I think something else has changed. In several Sims using a mixed wing, Point Defense weapons seem to target Type 1 until Only then do Type 2 take losses and Type 3 will only take losses when all the Type 2s are Has anyone else..

Host 199 surprise - I think something else has changed. In several Sims using a mixed wing, Point Defense weapons seem to target Type 1 until Only then do Type 2 take losses and Type 3 will only take losses when all the Type 2s are Has anyone else..
Next:  Crystal immunity vs. webs (movement and detonatio..  
Author Message
Lord Lancelot

External


Since: Apr 16, 2007
Posts: 165



(Msg. 1) Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 4:27 pm
Post subject: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a
Archived from groups: alt>games>vgaplanets4 (more info?)

EE labor camp have been changed. EE Labor Camp pay 3mc instead of 12mc
now.

http://planets4.hood-net.org/wiki/index.php/Host_212a

http://planets4.hood-net.org/wiki/index.php/Labor_Camp

They can still make 4X more income than other LC race, by doing 4X
more camps for the same numbers of prisoners.

They need 25 prisoners per camp instead of 100.

So the build 4X more camps for the same 100K prisoners. (so they still
have 4X more income witch is as it should be).

They have a lot more deaths (more camps more deaths), and it take a
lot longer to make the supply needed for 4000 camps instead of 1000
(for 100K prisoners).

This mean even if you get huge amount of prisoners early (like let say
1M) you need a lot of times to build camps and a big part of the money
from camp, will be to build new factory, pay for the factory to
produce supply, and pay to build new camps.

So we have a more balanced EE, no more instant win if you get a nice
amount of prisoners, you will get the same income as before but it
will take time to reach it high peak.

EE will also need more prisoners arrival due to the increase death
rate.

Lord Lancelot

 >> Stay informed about: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a 
Back to top
Login to vote
Kaos

External


Since: Dec 26, 2007
Posts: 9



(Msg. 2) Posted: Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:33 pm
Post subject: Re: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Wow, another typical knee jerk reaction to a problem that doesn't
really exist because of a few complaints of hypothetical situations.

I think that while the original problem was never as bad as certain
people would make out, this is a double whammy against a race that
isn't played very often and rarely wins.
So they have the 25% bonus which allows them 4x the income (at 4x the
outlay for a race who's growth rate and income levels are laughable).
But to maintain the extra 10% death rate. To get this 25% bonus the
death rate is already higher as the rate is based on the number of
camps. So lets use the magic 100k figure thrown around here and work
this out. The EE has 100k prisoners, at 4000 camps that a death rate
of 31% for there now 12k. Compare that to anyone else with 1000 camps
they get 3k at a whopping death rate of 6%. Now these rates stay the
same because the rate is dependant on the camps and not the people in
them, so while the EE funds all but dry up in 10 turns for a TOTAL
income around 50k, the others get 42k over 30 turns. Now triple that
for labour mines and tell me where the problem is. BTW - I believe a
lizard with 100k colonists would get 43k after 10 turns and 58k after
20 and 63 after 30 turns.
Perhaps the original EE figures where a bit high, but this has created
a bigger problem, the master slaver race is no more it is now barely
average and still has its huge problems. To worry about races with
huge bonus's but also huge weaknesses whilst others have no problem
with either is just silly.

Now I might not have been around as long as some others but wasn't the
EE income increased for a reason in the first place. Maybe no one
ever played them because there ships cost the earth and there income
is rather lame. But while people keep complaining about hypothetical
problems, that in reality don't exist, then we will get no where
fast. But hey maybe they are loosing to a EE player right now and
have there reasons. So if your plan was to ruin the EE, job done.

Kaos

 >> Stay informed about: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a 
Back to top
Login to vote
rumata

External


Since: Nov 28, 2007
Posts: 12



(Msg. 3) Posted: Wed Dec 26, 2007 11:10 pm
Post subject: Re: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Dec 27, 2:19 pm, "Black No.1" <keineahnung... RemoveThis @gmx.de> wrote:
> I have been both on the receiving and dealing end, so I guess I might know what
> *can* happen
> and I'm really glad if something has been done.

So how many games did you win, where the capture of the single farm
world meant you were unstoppable? Also, do you feel you could have
pulled it off if your first victim (or the rest of the players) would
have been as skilled as you?

Again, I don't really have an opinion for or against the rule change,
I'd just rather see arguments backed up with game experience than
calculations. You see, according to my game experience the EE doesn't
need a tone down.


> Regarding your example: if you wait 30 turns to get the money out of your
> prisoners, well...
> As EE you want the money *fast* and at all costs to build a force that will
> capture/kill the the
> next one.

Yep, getting your reward fast is a _huge_ advantage. Kaos ignored
that. However, you are ignoring that the EE has a much higher up-front
investment. 4k supplies and 12k mc (to stay with the example) is _not_
easy to come by, especially not for an EE.


> If the EE needs a boost again, this can be
> done in *snall* steps.

I'd rather have liked to see evidence that the tone down is needed at
all.

Cheers,
Michael
 >> Stay informed about: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a 
Back to top
Login to vote
Myflowers

External


Since: May 16, 2007
Posts: 9



(Msg. 4) Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 12:22 am
Post subject: Re: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

> > If the EE needs a boost again, this can be
> > done in *snall* steps.
>
> I'd rather have liked to see evidence that the tone down is needed at
> all.
>
> Cheers,
> Michael

Indeed, tuning down a race to see if they "needs a boost again" isn't
a good strategy. I really wonder where this change come from... and
why. Surely from someone who has been killed early because he didn't
build up good defenses. How many game do you know has been won by the
EE in the last time???... In any case, I would have removed the 25%
thingy instead of the 12MCs per LC.

We are all Beta Testers, and I really amazed about how a few poeple
can influence to change things in this game.
 >> Stay informed about: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a 
Back to top
Login to vote
Kaos

External


Since: Dec 26, 2007
Posts: 9



(Msg. 5) Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 12:32 am
Post subject: Re: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

I agree the income coming fast is a huge bonus but lets not forget
that races with labour mines are getting the same amount of money as
the EE without the initial overlay *or* the significant death rate and
they generally don't need this income anywhere near as much as the EE
does.

Your statement about having to take everyone out before late game
because the EE is useless has just been made much harder. It also
doesn't cut much mustard with whines about the Scavengers being
overpowered. When the reply is simply take them out early.

Kaos
 >> Stay informed about: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a 
Back to top
Login to vote
Lord Lancelot

External


Since: Apr 16, 2007
Posts: 165



(Msg. 6) Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:08 am
Post subject: Re: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

> It also
> doesn't cut much mustard with whines about the Scavengers being
> overpowered. When the reply is simply take them out early.
>
> Kaos

That I would like to see, I'm available as a good Scav player for a
1-1, to see how you can kill them early, they are very strong early.

For the EE, I played them 2 times got a win and a second place, they
are extremly hard to play late game, but can be quiete powerful if
played right.
I'm now playing them with the Reduced income & increase death rate I
will tell you my input after the game finish.

My early view is they should get normal death rate like all other
slaver races.

Lord Lancelot
 >> Stay informed about: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a 
Back to top
Login to vote
Lord Lancelot

External


Since: Apr 16, 2007
Posts: 165



(Msg. 7) Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:12 am
Post subject: Re: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

I have seen a good share of EE wins in the P4 League (by different
players).

Lord Lancelot
 >> Stay informed about: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a 
Back to top
Login to vote
Kadesh

External


Since: May 05, 2007
Posts: 2



(Msg. 8) Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:48 am
Post subject: Re: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Dec 27, 9:32 am, Kaos <kadeba....RemoveThis@bigpond.com> wrote:
> I agree the income coming fast is a huge bonus but lets not forget
> that races with labour mines are getting the same amount of money as
> the EE without the initial overlay *or* the significant death rate and
> they generally don't need this income anywhere near as much as the EE
> does.

The mechanic for labor mines was changed. They are now dependent on
ore,
to get a good amount of money the planet needs to be at the edge of
explosion.

If I remember right before this change the EE get a double bonus 25%
prisoner/LC and 12 MC/LC. To remove one advantage was necessary,
which is a matter of opinion.

EE still get a bonus on LC compared to other races.

Kadesh
 >> Stay informed about: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a 
Back to top
Login to vote
Black No.1

External


Since: Jun 02, 2007
Posts: 159



(Msg. 9) Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 4:19 am
Post subject: Re: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

I have been both on the receiving and dealing end, so I guess I might know what
*can* happen
and I'm really glad if something has been done.

Regarding your example: if you wait 30 turns to get the money out of your
prisoners, well...
As EE you want the money *fast* and at all costs to build a force that will
capture/kill the the
next one.

Sure EE has weaknesses, especially in late game - so you'll have to take out
your enemies before.

Let's just see how this works out (and also for the new combat routines that are
to come in the
near future (at least I hope so)). If the EE needs a boost again, this can be
done in *snall* steps.

Cheers,
Jochen

"Kaos" <kadebahr3.TakeThisOut@bigpond.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:372af5da-2199-4f3f-b379-c9092c6cdb6d@a35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> Wow, another typical knee jerk reaction to a problem that doesn't
> really exist because of a few complaints of hypothetical situations.
>
> I think that while the original problem was never as bad as certain
> people would make out, this is a double whammy against a race that
> isn't played very often and rarely wins.
> So they have the 25% bonus which allows them 4x the income (at 4x the
> outlay for a race who's growth rate and income levels are laughable).
> But to maintain the extra 10% death rate. To get this 25% bonus the
> death rate is already higher as the rate is based on the number of
> camps. So lets use the magic 100k figure thrown around here and work
> this out. The EE has 100k prisoners, at 4000 camps that a death rate
> of 31% for there now 12k. Compare that to anyone else with 1000 camps
> they get 3k at a whopping death rate of 6%. Now these rates stay the
> same because the rate is dependant on the camps and not the people in
> them, so while the EE funds all but dry up in 10 turns for a TOTAL
> income around 50k, the others get 42k over 30 turns. Now triple that
> for labour mines and tell me where the problem is. BTW - I believe a
> lizard with 100k colonists would get 43k after 10 turns and 58k after
> 20 and 63 after 30 turns.
> Perhaps the original EE figures where a bit high, but this has created
> a bigger problem, the master slaver race is no more it is now barely
> average and still has its huge problems. To worry about races with
> huge bonus's but also huge weaknesses whilst others have no problem
> with either is just silly.
>
> Now I might not have been around as long as some others but wasn't the
> EE income increased for a reason in the first place. Maybe no one
> ever played them because there ships cost the earth and there income
> is rather lame. But while people keep complaining about hypothetical
> problems, that in reality don't exist, then we will get no where
> fast. But hey maybe they are loosing to a EE player right now and
> have there reasons. So if your plan was to ruin the EE, job done.
>
> Kaos
 >> Stay informed about: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a 
Back to top
Login to vote
Magik

External


Since: May 09, 2007
Posts: 96



(Msg. 10) Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 7:57 am
Post subject: Re: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Dec 27, 12:22 am, Myflowers <alfredo.pu... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> Indeed, tuning down a race to see if they "needs a boost again" isn't
> a good strategy. I really wonder where this change come from... and
> why. Surely from someone who has been killed early because he didn't
> build up good defenses. How many game do you know has been won by the
> EE in the last time???... In any case, I would have removed the 25%
> thingy instead of the 12MCs per LC.

I did just remove the 25% thingy, but unfortunately because of the
math involved, the bonus income is linked directly to it, which is why
I put it there in the first place. I'll have to figure out some other
math to make sure that the LC's are filled up 100% and still get the
income bonus.

Anyways, I'm not sure what is up with my diff program that I used to
let everyone know the release notes, but it wasn't my intention to
"sneak this in" by any means. Also, because of the faulty diff, I
didn't continue to work on the LC code before releasing it because I
knew that it was broken upon making that change.

Magik
 >> Stay informed about: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a 
Back to top
Login to vote
Black No.1

External


Since: Jun 02, 2007
Posts: 159



(Msg. 11) Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:07 pm
Post subject: Re: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

"Myflowers" <alfredo.punzi DeleteThis @gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:5396d4eb-47be-4fb2-a495-12350c98eadd@f3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>> > If the EE needs a boost again, this can be
>> > done in *snall* steps.
>>
>> I'd rather have liked to see evidence that the tone down is needed at
>> all.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Michael
>
> Indeed, tuning down a race to see if they "needs a boost again" isn't
> a good strategy. I really wonder where this change come from... and
> why. Surely from someone who has been killed early because he didn't
> build up good defenses. How many game do you know has been won by the
> EE in the last time???... In any case, I would have removed the 25%
> thingy instead of the 12MCs per LC.

Agreed, having more income would have hurt less as they now have to build more
labor camps - this together with the higher death rate may be a bit much.

> We are all Beta Testers, and I really amazed about how a few poeple
> can influence to change things in this game.

Of course we are Wink And I highly appreciate people looking at things from
several positions.


Cheers,
Jochen
 >> Stay informed about: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a 
Back to top
Login to vote
Lord Lancelot

External


Since: Apr 16, 2007
Posts: 165



(Msg. 12) Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:11 am
Post subject: Re: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Dec 28, 8:00 am, Sebastian <Sebast....TakeThisOut@nospam.nospam> wrote:
> > doesn't cut much mustard with whines about the Scavengers being
> > overpowered. When the reply is simply take them out early.
>
> Scavengers have to be killed in mid game.
>
> Sebastian

Witch races in your opinion have the economy and the tools to do
this ?

I do not agree with HYP being major threat, well not more dangerous to
the scav that any other race without Gravs defense.

Lord Lancelot
 >> Stay informed about: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a 
Back to top
Login to vote
GFM GToeroe

External


Since: Jul 28, 2005
Posts: 196



(Msg. 13) Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 7:00 am
Post subject: Re: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On 28 Dez., 15:11, Lord Lancelot <polan... DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:

> I do not agree with HYP being major threat, well not more dangerous to
> the scav that any other race without Gravs defense.

Doesn't it make a difference if one has at least one turn more time?

GFM GToeroe
 >> Stay informed about: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a 
Back to top
Login to vote
protomatter

External


Since: Apr 27, 2007
Posts: 119



(Msg. 14) Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 8:53 am
Post subject: Re: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Dec 28, 9:11 am, Lord Lancelot <polan....TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 28, 8:00 am, Sebastian <Sebast....TakeThisOut@nospam.nospam> wrote:
>
> > > doesn't cut much mustard with whines about the Scavengers being
> > > overpowered. When the reply is simply take them out early.
>
> > Scavengers have to be killed in mid game.
>
> > Sebastian
>
> Witch races in your opinion have the economy and the tools to do
> this ?
>
> I do not agree with HYP being major threat, well not more dangerous to
> the scav that any other race without Gravs defense.
>
> Lord Lancelot

i disagree, a hypership can be at a place in one turn to pose a
threat, simply by performing 1 single jump. with no warning or actie
track or scanners and no time to prepare defensive measures.
essentially a surprise attack.

wheras a non hyper race would require several turns to arrive in a
position to become a threat. and that arrival can be detected by
scanners over severals turns allowing the defender to prepare.

it is this surprise element without the time to prepare, that is
threatening.

its not just the EE its basically any hyperrace that has this
advantage of surprise. and in the early game even races with the
ability to deter hyperraces (grav mines), can be caught off gaurd. but
its the fact of the game, and i can can accept it.

Proto
 >> Stay informed about: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a 
Back to top
Login to vote
Lord Lancelot

External


Since: Apr 16, 2007
Posts: 165



(Msg. 15) Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:38 am
Post subject: Re: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Dec 28, 10:00 am, GFM GToeroe <g... DeleteThis @gtoeroe.de> wrote:
> On 28 Dez., 15:11, Lord Lancelot <polan... DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I do not agree with HYP being major threat, well not more dangerous to
> > the scav that any other race without Gravs defense.
>
> Doesn't it make a difference if one has at least one turn more time?
>
> GFM GToeroe

Yes Hyp attack have a surprise and fast movement is a great advantage,
but this is vs all races (with no grav well or grav mines) and not a
perticular (unique) weakness of the Scavenger.

The simple fact that their only potential weakness is from a HYP
attack from afar should make one think about the balance of the scav.

A standard HW defensive fleet can be build by any race to defeat even
the dangerous turn 9-10 EE attack. At turn 1 you know their is Hyp
races in your game you can start building a defensive fleet before
expanding to other planets.
Further more we have zillion race with counter to HYP races (Grav
mines and well just to name a few). But I see no real threat to the
scavenger beside the Crystal having a very strong defense.
Planets is a rock, paper, scisor, with many races having an advantage
of a few specific, but when you throw Rock, Paper, Scisor and
Scavenger with equal player skill, my money is on the scav.

I am willing to prove it in game if text is not enough.

Lord Lancelot
 >> Stay informed about: EE Labor Camp Changed in Host 212a 
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
   Game Forums (Home) -> VGA Planets 4 All times are: Ekaterinburg, Islamabad, Karachi, Tashkent (change)
Goto page 1, 2, 3
Page 1 of 3

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]