Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Fiendish Fray [Planning]
2017-11-11, 08:31 PM (This post was last modified: 2017-11-18 09:10 PM by Kaonicping.)
Post: #1
Fiendish Fray [Planning]
So, I've finished my work for this week and it's time to get started on planning this tournament. I notice T3hJimmer has just announced another tournament, so I'll try to time it so no-one's forced to pick one of the two to enter. Without further ado, I present:


Fiendish Fray

(old stuff)

This will be centred around points systems, inspired by PokeBattle (not that I have much positive to say about PokeBattle, but still). Many functional components will have an associated point cost in one of several categories (eg weapon points, support points). Vehicles must fit into one of several 'classes' (eg fighter, healer), which will have allocated to them a maximum amount of each of the different point types. For example a 'healer' class might be allowed to have only 8 weapon points, but up to 20 support points, while a fighter may only be allowed 1 support point and 10 weapon points. They will also have a maximum materials allowance (which will be somewhat lower than other tournaments to keep FPS bearable). The fighter might get 7.5k materials, while the healer might get 20k. On top of that there may be further allowances or restrictions, for example repair tentacles might be banned on all vehicles apart from the healer, and fighters will be restricted to being airborne. Each entrant will submit a team of vehicles attached to a spawnstick, and there will be a limit on how many vehicles you can have, which might simply be a limit on the total materials cost of your team. Note the heavy use of 'may' and 'might'; many things remain to be decided and to that end I've created a google forms poll to take your input on the details (I didn't make a poll in this thread since I have a lot more than one question to ask). Even if you don't feel like voting, read the poll before making suggestions since there is more information there which I cba to repeat here. What I will repeat, though:

The poll

Points systems: (blue = definite, orange = maybe)

Vehicle points: A score attached to each vehicle class that isn't affected by the blocks in the BP. This will replace materials cost as the decider of how many vehicles you can fit on one team

Weapon points: A points cost for each weapon. Simple weapons (if not banned) will be scored simply, while APS will probably have a cost per autoloader. Idk how CRAMs will be scored.

Support points: A points cost for 'support systems'. These will include shields, LAMS, anti-missile controllers as well as repair bots and repair tentacles (and maybe other things like docking stations).

Power points: A points cost per unit of power output. Note that when power-consuming systems may also cost other kinds of points. I will take electric engine output into account too, although idk whether systems that draw directly from the batteries when powered by steam turbines will incur any power cost.

Armour points: A points cost per unit volume of armour, taking the value of that armour block into account. This will probably just be the materials spent on armour divided by some number.

Supply points: A points cost per unit of fuel and ammo storage, as well as perhaps ammo processors and fuel refineries.

Propulsion points: A simple points cost per propulsion and steering component. Small jets and propellers will be cheap, while rudders and CJEs will be expensive (the idea being you're only supposed to have a few of them) some classes are likely to have restrictions on which propulsion systems they can use.

Note that some things are very likely to be banned, such as spinblock rams, any and all exploits, Lua and warp drives.

As you will see in the poll, it's not yet decided whether this will be a land or sea battle, so make sure to vote for the one you want.

Submissions, when they open, will be either via PM, via posting the BP in this thread (not recommended, people can DL it and counter you), or by emailing

At the end of the tournament I will create a new poll where you vote for the prettiest team and for the prettiest single vehicle. Note that being pretty confers no advantage during the battle phase.

Please suggest stuff down below, and/or argue for certain rules. There's probably some very good possibilities I forgot from the poll, so stick any suggestions here and I'll take them into account.

I'm going to finalise the rules sometime around next weekend or maybe slightly before.


The poll has closed and the results are available.

(2017-07-10 02:50 AM)Resolas Wrote:  Forward broadside is the best broadside
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-11, 09:18 PM (This post was last modified: 2017-11-11 09:23 PM by Kaonicping.)
Post: #2
RE: Fiendish Fray [Planning]
Thanks for the replies, we've got 2 now plus my own.

Someone (I know who, but this is meant to be anonymous) said they 'don't quite get' the points question. I'll try to clarify, but inevitably I'll just be repeating pretty much what I already said so it might not help.

The weapon points will act just like the weapon points in the now cancelled squadron shootout deux; each simple weapon, each missile gantry, each autoloader etc. will add to the 'weapon points' total of that vehicle, which may not exceed the maximum allowed for that class.

In this tournament I plan to take it further and introduce different point systems (which will be independent of each other) as a balancing technique to prevent anything too crazy and in the case of support points to make the meta less meta so other build styles can do reasonably well.

Each class will be assigned a total for each point type, so it can't have more than 20 weapon points, 10 support, 15 armour etc. And to confuse things even more, we could add 'universal points' which can count as any of the other types of points to give more flexibility in classes. Now that I've thought of it, I'll add universal points as one of the options, although the points system is pretty confusing and convoluted already Big Grin. You can submit a new response under the same name with just that one box ticked or possibly edit your response if you already submitted.

(2017-07-10 02:50 AM)Resolas Wrote:  Forward broadside is the best broadside
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-11, 09:20 PM
Post: #3
RE: Fiendish Fray [Planning]
is this land or air based?
sounds fun Tongue

Never sail out to far on the daft raft.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-11, 09:23 PM (This post was last modified: 2017-11-11 09:23 PM by Kaonicping.)
Post: #4
RE: Fiendish Fray [Planning]
(2017-11-11 09:20 PM)Char_charodon Wrote:  is this land or air based?
sounds fun Tongue

That's up in the air (geddit? Big Grin) at the moment, feel free to vote on the one you want.

(2017-07-10 02:50 AM)Resolas Wrote:  Forward broadside is the best broadside
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-12, 09:33 AM
Post: #5
RE: Fiendish Fray [Planning]
Sounds interesting! Smile
I'd say we only need weapon points to prevent missile and APS spam. Good for balance and performance.
Vehicle points for fleet composition sounds good but material cost per fleet plus max materials restrictions for the classes might be better. That way you could choose between having 2 big fighters or having 4 small ones without having to fill the materials allowance for every single vehicle.
Max allowed speed and maneuverability is another useful restriction and maybe allowed structure blocks for certain classes. For example fast fighters can only have wood and glass so small-ish AA guns have a chance to kill them. Tanks have a high allowed cost but can't use active defenses while vehicles with lots of active defenses can only use weak structure blocks.
Land battles would be fun but land tends to flip far away vehicles upside down at the moment. Unless there's a fix for that land is probably not good for team battles with large distances between the vehicles.
Just some of my thoughts. I think it would be better to keep the rules as simple as possible while allowing lots of flexibility.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-12, 10:13 AM (This post was last modified: 2017-11-12 10:14 AM by SPD.)
Post: #6
RE: Fiendish Fray [Planning]
At this RP cost, I think land vehicles work just fine. All the tournaments that are planned now have too high RP cost to work on land, so I think having one land based tourney could be refreshing.

Also, I hope that the rules aren't too complicated like Menti's cancelled tourney, the complexity of those rules instantly put me off, and I believe I'm not alone. Also, too many restrictions will lead to the same vehicles that just look a bit differently, I think having the rules less restrictive can only benefit as the vehicles would be more diverse.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-12, 01:15 PM (This post was last modified: 2017-11-12 01:17 PM by Kaonicping.)
Post: #7
RE: Fiendish Fray [Planning]
(2017-11-12 10:13 AM)SPD Wrote:  At this RP cost, I think land vehicles work just fine. All the tournaments that are planned now have too high RP cost to work on land, so I think having one land based tourney could be refreshing.

Also, I hope that the rules aren't too complicated like Menti's cancelled tourney, the complexity of those rules instantly put me off, and I believe I'm not alone. Also, too many restrictions will lead to the same vehicles that just look a bit differently, I think having the rules less restrictive can only benefit as the vehicles would be more diverse.

As I originally planned it, it could have been about 5x as complicated as that tourney Big Grin. But looking at the poll results now, none of the potential points systems have been voted for by more than 50% of people, so if it stays that way it'll just be weapon and support points. Someone also made the important point that the materials limit should take care of most of this, which is true, but with just materials it allows for a lot crazier glass cannons and things like that, although the much greater flexibility could be good.

Weapon and support points are here to stay, though. As it stands the likes of lasers just can't compete with APS spamguns when their target can just smoke a couple fags and then take basically no damage Tongue. Support points are also important so that there is a clear limit on shielding, since there's no real reason not to add more stacked shields most of the time, which is tedious and makes some shell types pretty useless.

I'm thinking of scoring APS on component count rather than per autoloader as this is much less effort for the builder (and me) to check. Support points will still be per shield, per repair bot, per repair tentacle and per LAMS node etc.

The average results so far:

-6.5 classes
-50% voted 'intended role without any particular care for realism'
-66.7% voted sea
-50/50 between 'few banned blocks' and 'everything mildly cancerous'
-Very mixed on subs; 33.3% don't want them at all, 33.3% want them without shallow maximum depth, 16.7% want them with such a restriction, and 16.7% want that but also restricted spaceships.
-66.7% voted Swiss format
-66.7% voted not best of 3
-Supply got 3 votes, propulsion and universal got 2 each and all the others got 1
-4.67 vehicles per team
-96700 materials per team (someone voted 100, I assumed they meant 100k)
-66.7% plan to enter, 33.3% maybe (although I guess most people not interested won't have bothered voting
-Only one person voted NO ÖATS, the rest said 'All of the above'
-Someone made quite an important point: 'Give me some fuggin oats you fat fug!'. I'll look into this to ensure that everyone gets their fair share of oats.

(2017-07-10 02:50 AM)Resolas Wrote:  Forward broadside is the best broadside
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-12, 04:29 PM
Post: #8
RE: Fiendish Fray [Planning]
Sounds good so far. I'd like to see a land based tournament but the unreliable wheels and despeawning terrain is not so ideal for that. Water + air sounds good.
I'll be happy if unrealistic vehicles will be allowed. I'd like to see upside down battleship airships, Whales with anatomically correct insides and giant crabs with a gunboat on top. XD I don't mind realistic-ish vehicles. I'll probably build some of those coz I'm boring.
Glad to see not much will be restricted. Only the cheeziest stuff needs to go if you ask me. With some class limitations here and there it should be pretty fun.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-12, 07:59 PM
Post: #9
RE: Fiendish Fray [Planning]
(2017-11-12 04:29 PM)Tomson Wrote:  Sounds good so far. I'd like to see a land based tournament but the unreliable wheels and despeawning terrain is not so ideal for that. Water + air sounds good.
I'll be happy if unrealistic vehicles will be allowed. I'd like to see upside down battleship airships, Whales with anatomically correct insides and giant crabs with a gunboat on top. XD I don't mind realistic-ish vehicles. I'll probably build some of those coz I'm boring.
Glad to see not much will be restricted. Only the cheeziest stuff needs to go if you ask me. With some class limitations here and there it should be pretty fun.

I'm never going to ban unrealistic vehicles since I'd basically be banning myself Big Grin. Also I think some of the best-looking vehicles are fantasy ones, particularly airships with guns on both the top and bottom.

(2017-07-10 02:50 AM)Resolas Wrote:  Forward broadside is the best broadside
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-12, 11:06 PM
Post: #10
RE: Fiendish Fray [Planning]
(2017-11-12 07:59 PM)Kaonicping Wrote:  
(2017-11-12 04:29 PM)Tomson Wrote:  Sounds good so far. I'd like to see a land based tournament but the unreliable wheels and despeawning terrain is not so ideal for that. Water + air sounds good.
I'll be happy if unrealistic vehicles will be allowed. I'd like to see upside down battleship airships, Whales with anatomically correct insides and giant crabs with a gunboat on top. XD I don't mind realistic-ish vehicles. I'll probably build some of those coz I'm boring.
Glad to see not much will be restricted. Only the cheeziest stuff needs to go if you ask me. With some class limitations here and there it should be pretty fun.

I'm never going to ban unrealistic vehicles since I'd basically be banning myself Big Grin. Also I think some of the best-looking vehicles are fantasy ones, particularly airships with guns on both the top and bottom.

You mean something like this:
   
My biggest Airship Replica up to date. Around 200k Materials in cost, also puts you into degraded mode.

When having problems please provide:
  • An accurate Description
  • A Picture
  • The Blueprint of the vehicle
Otherwise help is not possible.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)