Massive Fleet Update & Season 2!

I already did the math with previous damages but reload and lock on are far more beneficial to macro than to lances and thats why macros DPS skyrocket

Beernchips, This is true, because for Lance you should not take "reload", but you need to take "brace for impact" or "lock on" and get other buffs

Also no matter what your speed is you're not able to fly away from the enemy at that speed. If you do, your lances can't shoot as they are out of firing arc. So you've got move at an angle, this means you ain't going as fast.

Added to that you can't "push" a macro fleet off an objective, so the macro ships can control the map.

Bosie, Do you want an ultimatum imba?) While you are running at a 45-degree angle from the enemy and inflicting damage, the imperial enemy tries to catch up in a straight line and does not cause any damage. Tell me honestly, who would you like to be in this situation, run away at 200 speeds or catch up at 160 speeds?) It is strange that players don’t strive for balance, and that their favorite faction would be the strongest.

@yabatman
I do not wish for this to devolve into a scuffle, but you clearly base your points on very simplified mathematical model, which assumes the 2 stationary ships firing away at each other's broadsides, without considering other circumstances.

Desolator is a battleship with 200 speed and 4 DEGREES PER SECOND OF TURNING SPEED, AND NO HIGH ENERGY TURN. This thing takes forever to turn and mind you, we are talking about my favorite ship in the game here. Trust me, I know what I'm talking about, you just had to pick the one ship I have used by far the most. And I will base the following calculations with a stupid AI in mind, a player will be even better at closing the distance.

Let's consider a Desolator class battleship trying to escape keep distance from a Retribution class battleship chasing it.
Desolator: 200 speed
Retribution: 160 speed

On paper Desolator is faster. BUT. The thing is, if Desolator wants to actually fight and not JUST escape, it needs to angle itself so that the Retribution is inside its 90 degree cone of broadside weaponry.
Let's introduce a parameter "angle of bow" (alpha). Let it be an angle between line connecting the 2 ships, and the line running perpendicular to Desolator.

In other words, when Desolator is perfectly perpendicular broadsides to Retribution, angle of bow is zero. If it's running in a straight line away from it (or towards it), then the angle is 90 degrees.
It is not what "angle of bow" historically was, but it will be more useful in this form right now.
The Chaos ships unleash most of their firepower from broadsides, meaning they need to maintaing the alpha of up to 45 degrees.
Let's assume that in a certain point in time, Desolator is flying away, at an angle of 45 degrees, which allows its broadsides to just about fire on Retribution.

If we consider radial and tangential components of the Desolator's speed, relative to Retribution, you wil see that their values are as follows:
Vr = Vsin(alpha)
Vt = Vcos(alpha)

Where V = speed of 200, Vt = tangential (perpendicular) speed, Vr = radial (towards or away) speed, alpha = angle of bow. All speeds are that of Desolator of course, we do not take into account the Retribution's speed just yet.

The tangential component is perpendicular speed, and it is not important when calculating distance between the 2 ships. We'll mostly ignore it. The value of Desolator's radial speed, in the borderline case of 45 degree angle on bow, is Vr = 200sin(45) = 141.42.

Meaning that Desolator can escape at the speed of max 141 while maintaining fire. In real battlefield scenario the angle will be closer to 40-35 degrees if you pay close attention, which translates to Vr = 200sin(35) = 114.71.

So Desolator can run and maintain fire while escaping at a speed of 115-141 in best case scenarios.

Whereas Retribution will fly at full 160 speed, straight at it, while firing all 3 lance turrets at it, and taking damage reduced by 83 prow armor, not 66 armor. That does not even take into account the summary execution which gives the Retri higher reserves of combustion gauge, AND the fact that Retribution will be more likely to use Reload stance, while Desolator will want to stay in Lock On.

But you will say "Desolator can just turn away, fly back at full 200 speed, and then turn back and fire again".

Yeah sure. But Desolator has a 4 degree/s turning rate, so assuming a 45 degree alpha (perfect scenario), it will take you over 11 seconds to turn fully away, and then next 11 seconds after you escape to turn back. giving Retri ample time to regen its shields, and it doesn't even take into account the time you need to increase distance, running away from Retri at 40 speed difference. Plus the summary execution.

So, even with calculations one can clearly see that the kiting perspectives for Desolator are not very favorable. A lot of effort to achieve rather little, all the while doing not very impressive damage. And believe me, in practice this is exactly what happens.

It is even worse against Space Marines or Necrons.

P. S.
As a sidenote, it's actually a practical application of what I had read a while ago (long before the first game was even been announced), that the Imperial warships rely on their heavily armored prow to protect them while closing in on the enemy. Back in the time I had a bit different image of how that would look like.
I didn't discover America, I know, just an afterthought.

Bosie, Do you want an ultimatum imba?) While you are running at a 45-degree angle from the enemy and inflicting damage, the imperial enemy tries to catch up in a straight line and does not cause any damage. Tell me honestly, who would you like to be in this situation, run away at 200 speeds or catch up at 160 speeds?) It is strange that players don’t strive for balance, and that their favorite faction would be the strongest.

I'm not asking for Chaos to be the strongest. I was the one pushing for them to be nerfed in alpha due to how well lances worked with lock on back then. However the nerfs went too far and now Chaos lances are trash.

I'm looking for Chaos lances to be competitive.

Ahriman, The fact of the matter is that mathematically Lance has its advantages over macro, and the ships of Chaos over the ships of the Empire, otherwise it would be an imbalance, the outcome of the battle will depend on the skill of the players.
Consider your examples. You write that Desolator has "4 degrees per second" and this is a big drawback. But wait, Retribution turns out to be 4 degrees per second too)). These battleships have the same flaws and are in equal conditions. But why did you mention the flaw in Retribution? From your comments out 4 degrees is a flaw in the Desolator but does not affect Retribution, very interestingly))

Then you calculated the speed of the battleship Desolator at the minimum angle of attack, it is 140, good. In the battleship Retribution speed 160, the difference is only 20 speed, it is provided that he goes in a straight line. That is, the ships will slowly converge, but
all this time, the Gums can attack and Retribution cannot attack. Suppose Retribution got close to 4.5k distance and then what? He will begin to turn around to attack? First, as you did not mention, he has 4 degrees)). Secondly, while it turns around, the Desolator will move far apart. Thirdly, even if he is able to attack the gums at close range, he has a plasma macro. It is not even simply macro, the plasma is much weaker. The only advantage of Retribution - ram. But, you need to be a noob, so that with such advantages to admit such a clumsy and slow ship to yourself).

Regarding the 45-degree turn to attack and to a straight line to run away from the enemy - Do you not move at the moment of the turn?) When you turn from 45 degrees to 0 degrees in 11 seconds, your speed changes from 140 to 200 over 11 seconds) All this time you are moving and after 3 seconds your speed has become equal and further that your speed becomes greater than the enemy.
The funny thing is that having a clear advantage over the imperial battleship in the example you cited, you complain that Chaos is weak and urgently needs to be strengthened, and the Imperial battleship imba, therefore playing for Chaos you cannot win by pressing one button).
I advise you to learn from skillful Chaos players who have received an Epic and Legendary rank; they have no problems using the Chaos Fleet. Do you know which faction on these ranks is missing? Adeptus Mechanicus, this fraction is really very weak at the moment.

Bosie, maybe you do not know, but chaotic Lance have the same DPS as imperial lance). But, probably as with an example of the angle of rotation, Chaos has a drawback, but the Imperial Navy does not have such a drawback).
"I'm not asking for Chaos to be the strongest" - But Chaos should be stronger than the Imperial Navy. .

@yabatman
Because in the example scenario Desolator is the one that actually needs to keep turning in order to manoeuvre.
Whereas Retribution is not affected as much. It can go straight ahead with no worry at all, as whatever happens, it will be good for Retri. Turning won't mean the difference between attacking and not since it has lance turrets. Desolator for that matter can't go straight and attack at the same time.
And such Retri will go in the straight line. Why would it start turning on say, 13500 range when it can keep going and only turn (taking its time) when it's pretty much right on top of Desolator. Still attacking, mind you. The only thing that could force it to turn would be bombs. But why would it turn when it can all ahead full.

Regarding the 45-degree turn to attack and to a straight line to run away from the enemy - Do you not move at the moment of the turn?) When you turn from 45 degrees to 0 degrees in 11 seconds, your speed changes from 140 to 200 over 11 seconds) All this time you are moving and after 3 seconds your speed has become equal and further that your speed becomes greater than the enemy.

You have completely missed the point. Yes, it is indeed the way to increase distance. The only possible and not particularly efficient. However, during the whole manoeuvre Desolator.doesn't.attack.

Plus, as you have not taken into account yet, the map isn't infinite. Even while maintaning this game of keep 45/turn/run away/keep 45, you will literally run out of map very soon, forcing you to turn and allowing the chaser to catch up rather easily.

And this is all assuming a duel. With multiple ships it's a child's play to literally corner the Chaos fleet attempting to kite.

I advise you to learn from skillful Chaos players who have received an Epic and Legendary rank; they have no problems using the Chaos Fleet. Do you know which faction on these ranks is missing? Adeptus Mechanicus, this fraction is really very weak at the moment.

Well thank you for proving our point that lance DPS on paper currently means nothing.
Guess what? Both factions are long range, lance oriented factions in principle. With AdMech having supposedly even better lances.
Where's that almighty lance DPS you keep bringing up? If lances were that strong then surely we'd have a couple Chaos/AdMech places in the top 10 of the last competitive season at least? Last time I checked Tau reign supreme, with very little space for anyone else.
I really advise you to play Chaos in the first place. A classic lance/carrier themed Chaos fleet, not six Slaughter/Carnage spam or Repulsive galore. If you tried it you wouldn't put out mathhammer arguments because you'd know they don't tell the whole story. If you can't see it through the maths I have presented, then see it for yourself in practice.
You will sooner rather than later, get cornered, unless you play against someone who uses keyboard only.
Yes, AdMech is really weak. So is Chaos.

"I'm not asking for Chaos to be the strongest" - But Chaos should be stronger than the Imperial Navy.

No. Chaos should be stronger than the Imperial Navy in some areas (long range, carrier ordnance, mobility), while weaker in others (macros, brawling).
Well, they do have visibly weaker macros now. But everything Chaos can do now, the IN can do better. Right down to mobility, courtesy of summary execution combustion gauge bonus. Except maybe carriers, but those are so bad all across the board, they are non-factor compared to the first game. And then there are other factions. Good luck trying to outshoot Eldar (holofields, stealth) or run from the Space Marines/Tyranids, even Necrons. And those quite literally rip Chaos apart in the inevitable close quarters.

I'll repeat it again.
Maths is good. I study physics myself. But simple Maths only tells the story when perfect conditions are met. Conditions that rarely happen in reality.
If all balancing could be done on the basis of DPS charts alone, we wouldn't need this forum. But it doesn't work like that.

@yabatman
And by the way, I have just taken notice of something.

Again, do not consider this as an offence, but why in your calculations do you assume that the weapons accuracy given in the description is exactly the percentage of projectiles that actually hit the target?

I'm genuinely curious, is there stated somewhere that this is what is supposed to happen?

Because as I understand it, that "accuracy" factor seems somewhat arbitrary.
I sometimes like to do IN vs IN or Chaos vs IN skirmish with the sole purpose of forcing a typical line battle slugging match (which is easy since AI doesn't use any other tactic given the choice).

I may be wrong here, but I could swear that at large distances, a lot more macro shells hit the target than one or two fifths, as should be the case. Even without lock on.

Ahriman, Speak honestly "I want chaos to be imba, I want to win without any effort," because your nagging is unreasonable.

Because in the example scenario Desolator is the one that actually needs to keep turning in order to manoeuvre.

So Desolator needs to turn and maneuver, but Retribution is not needed, very interesting. Maybe Retribution needs to turn off the guns and wait for you to attack him?)

Whereas Retribution is not affected as much.

Of course it does not. It only affects Desolator, of course.

Desolator for that matter can't go straight and attack at the same time.

But Retribution can go straight and attack.

And it will go in the straight line. Why would it start turning on say, 13500K range when it can keep going and only turn (taking its time) when it's pretty much right on top of Desolator.

Do you know which DPS Plasma Macro has at 13.5k range? This is not Lance, and if Retribution is deployed to attack, he will simply go away at 200 speeds from him.

You have completely missed the point. Yes, it is indeed the way to increase distance. The only possible and not particularly efficient. However, during the whole manoeuvre Desolator.doesn't.attack.

Plus, as you have not taken into account yet, the map isn't infinite. Even while maintaning this game of keep 45/turn/run away/keep 45, you will literally run out of map very soon, forcing you to turn and allowing the chase to catch up rather easily.

And this is all assuming a duel. With multiple ships it's a child's play to literally corner the Chaos fleet attempting to kite.

You know, you act like a child who doesn't want to understand the other side. You yourself said the working tactics, but this is not enough for you. Just think, what should the player do for the imperial battleship in this situation? The enemy has a 25% higher speed, 4.5k + damage is always higher, he can endlessly kite and inflict damage, if played correctly, how to resist? You can try to cut corners, go ahead of the curve, clamp in the corner and ram, but it is very difficult to do, it is easier to run away with superiority in speed and damage. And you want that Retribution would not have any opportunities for Desolator to resist, brilliantly).

Well thank you for proving our point that lance DPS on paper currently means nothing.

And what did it prove? Ad Mech cruisers are the most expensive, if we take into account the ratio of damage and health to the cost of points, they will be very unprofitable. And you know what? Ad Mech cruisers have 160 speeds). This should not be a fast fleet, but their problem is different, the mechanics of Nova are not thought out for multiplayer.

Where's that almighty lance DPS you keep bringing up?

divided by the DPS on the cost of points of the cruiser, you will see the real effectiveness of the damage. So consider that their expensive cruisers have the same amount of health as cheap counterparts of the Imperial Navy or Chaos, just calculate the ratio of health and cost of points. For example, you can buy Executor for 197 points, which is cheaper than any Ad Mech cruiser. That's how you count well))

If lances were that strong then surely we'd have a couple Chaos/AdMech places in the top 10 of the last competitive season at least? Last time I checked Tau reign supreme, with very little space for anyone else.

You didn’t check well. At the Epic Rank there were 2 players for Chaos, and you know how much Hell Mech was? No one.

I really advise you to play Chaos in the first place. A classic lance/carrier themed Chaos fleet, not six Slaughter/Carnage spam or Repulsive galore.

Why say not to use these ships? What is the artificial limitation? Is it not part of the Chaos fleet? Can you even say to play only destroyers and frigates? You whine that the ships of Chaos are weak, but tell me not to play for strong ships, you are again brilliant) .
And if you don’t know, I had an Epic rank for Chaos before the wipe, so I’ve played enough for this faction.

If you tried it you wouldn't put out mathhammer arguments because you'd know they don't tell the whole story. If you can't see it through the maths I have presented, then see it for yourself in practice.

First, will you do the calculations for DPS and the health of Ad Mech Cruisers in the ratio of their cost points. Which you cited as an example, Then I will talk to you about mathematics).

You will sooner rather than later, get cornered, unless you play against someone who uses keyboard only.

Apparently you play with one hand mouse

Yes, AdMech is really weak. So is Chaos.

You are mistaken. Mechanic ships are expensive and most importantly, they cannot use their advantage with Nova. And Chaos feels very well.

No. Chaos should be stronger than the Imperial Navy in some areas (long range, carrier ordnance, mobility), while weaker in others (macros, brawling).

So how can Imperial cruisers take advantage of macro and ram advantages if they can't get close? You just want a convenient and weak opponent who cannot oppose anything.

I'll repeat it again.
Maths is good. I study physics myself. But simple Maths only tells the story when perfect conditions are met. Conditions that rarely happen in reality.

As I already wrote, the fact is that there should be a balance and opponents should be on an equal footing, as far as possible with an asymmetric balance. If from the point of view of mathematics they are equal it is good (according to calculations Chaos surpasses), then the outcome of the battle will determine the circumstances and skills of the players, the ability to predict events. But not the ultimate superiority of the faction, when the enemy can not oppose anything, as you want.

Again, do not consider this as an offence, but why in your calculations do you assume that the weapons accuracy given in the description is exactly the percentage of projectiles that actually hit the target?

I'm genuinely curious, is there stated somewhere that this is what is supposed to happen?

And what percentage of hit should be? Do you think that it is more than the stated? Maybe the developers are lying?) I'm curious how you need to strongly want to prove that Macro imba, that you have already doubted the percentage of hits?) Well, according to your logic, suddenly the number of hits in reality is less?
Then Lance is generally imba, need to nerfit

Sigh...

I feel like I'm beating head against the wall.

So Desolator needs to turn and maneuver, but Retribution is not needed, very interesting. Maybe Retribution needs to turn off the guns and wait for you to attack him?)

I have already explained it. Clearly reading with comprehension is a skill you should work on.

You know, you act like a child who doesn't want to understand the other side.

This here is a part that sums up yourself pretty well. Think about it.

Why say not to use these ships? What is the artificial limitation? Is it not part of the Chaos fleet? Can you even say to play only destroyers and frigates? You whine that the ships of Chaos are weak, but tell me not to play for strong ships, you are again brilliant)

Because if one wants to play a macro brawling fleet, they might as well pick IN.
I will explain it for the last time. Chaos is supposed to be a long ranged, fast fleet with high focus on carriers supported by lances. It is how they were in the original Battlefleet Gothic, that is how they were in the first game, and that is how they're supposed to work according to the lore.
While there's absolutely nothing wrong with using the ships above, or even making whole fleets focused on them, there IS something wrong if they are the only viable ships on the roster.

And what percentage of hit should be? Do you think that it is more than the stated? Maybe the developers are lying?) I'm curious how you need to strongly want to prove that Macro imba, that you have already doubted the percentage of hits?) Well, according to your logic, suddenly the number of hits in reality is less?

Not according to "my logic", but according to simple logic.
If you dared to put just a little bit of thought into this, you'd find out that we're not playing a browser game and shots with their accuracy are not just RNG hit or not, and they are VERY unlikely to fall under the law of large numbers.

The in-game macros fire projectiles that have to actually fly and hit first before the damage is applied, they are not exactly pre-determined upon firing whether they hit or not. Because the ship can change trajectory for instance.
And if it doesn't, how is the target's geometry accounted for? Ships are not round targets, their cut-away is an ellipse, so the projectiles' accuracy will vary depending on the axis of their spread.
So how exactly the "accuracy" parameter translates into the frequency or hit/miss? Is it the starting parameter? Or is the starting parameter something else, non-linear and meticulously adjusted so that the given accuracy is actually the frequency of hits landed.

That's what I wanted to know. And I never said that the given accuracy does not translate into the frequency. That was my theory and my personal experience that I would love to get more information about.
But apparently I was foolish to think that your insight transcends simple multiplication and division, not to mention my wanting knowledge on the matter is a reason to laugh.

Anyway, I have no interest in curing your blindness, wasted enough time already. You can live in your imaginary world were lances in BFGA2 are overpowered. Numerous players out here agree that Chaos simply can not be played in its intended playstyle, it can not effectively kite its weapons damage output is insufficient to effectively deal with most other factions right now and carriers are overall on the weak side as of now.

I have already explained it. Clearly reading with comprehension is a skill you should work on.

I read that you are making an unfounded statement, simply because you want to think so. You write "Math is good, BUT..." after your "BUT" you can say anything unreasonable. It looks like this: "The facts point to this, BUT I will think differently ignoring the facts"

Chaos is supposed to be a long ranged, fast fleet with high focus on carriers supported by lances.

Who is supposed to be? Are you supposed to? Are you a developer? Or did the developers tell you that nobody else knows?)
If, as you said, the creator assumed, then all the other ships simply did not exist or there would be a restriction on use, as with corvettes. The developers gave you the ships, and you can assemble any fleet that you want, this is only the player who decides. So any restrictions you have come up with yourself.

If you dared to put just a little bit of thought into this, you'd find out that we're not playing a browser game and shots with their accuracy are not just RNG hit or not, and they are VERY unlikely to fall under the law of large numbers.

You yourself just named another disadvantage of Macro in front of Lance)) So in reality, the frequency of hitting Macro will be less than what is indicated.

As for accuracy, and what do you want to say? Does the random give Macro any advantages over Lance? It does not give any advantages. If we assume that in one battle it was 70% on average, then in the next battle it will be 50%. And if you add up all the battles you are conducting, then the "Law of Large Numbers" will be used. This once again proves how you want to distort the facts, that would prove your opinion, which is not true.

Anyway, I have no interest in curing your blindness, wasted enough time already. You can live in your imaginary world were lances in BFGA2 are overpowered.

You, as always, make unfounded and meaningless statements. As we can see, you have blindness, not me. Because you ignore the facts, make unsubstantiated statements and consider this to be a weighty argument. But it is not. You can think up in your imaginary world that “The fleet needs to be composed only and not otherwise”, “matimatika does not mean anything”, “random hits give advantages”, “speed and range of attack mean nothing”, “I want an ultimatum advantage over opponents "and other nonsense that you claimed to be unshakable true, because you said so. I advise you to look at things objectively. Good luck.

@yaBATMAN I agree with you in a perfect situation when ships are flying at a distance of 13,5k parallel to each other, and without reload, lances outperform macros. But that unlikely gonna happen. In reality to keep your distance you have to turn away and fly in the oposite direction, where you are not able to inflict any damage at your enemy. After you reached enough distance you turn and get one or when you are lucky two salvos which inflict very low damage. And then you start again running away until the map is over.
To make this gameplay workable the damage and the reloadtime had to be massively increased (Lets say 4-5 times, DPS stays the same). You Fire and during reload you are building up distance. But with the low damage, chaos inflicts at the moment, this tactic not gonna work.

@torgen As I already said, I believe that opponents should have an equal chance of winning, and not the domination of one faction over another, as some believe. Chaos can kite, having an advantage in speed, attack from a distance, having an advantage in range, and the Imperial ships try to get closer with a lower speed to catch the enemy’s fleet using different tricks.

I read that you are making an unfounded statement, simply because you want to think so. You write "Math is good, BUT..." after your "BUT" you can say anything unreasonable. It looks like this: "The facts point to this, BUT I will think differently ignoring the facts"

The part after BUT was there to explain that maths represents whatever conditions you assume prior to making calculations, but the real practical situations are a lot more complex, and simplified maths does not always account for that. Certainly your maths doesn't.
Again, you fail at the basic skill of reading with comprehension.

Who is supposed to be? Are you supposed to? Are you a developer? Or did the developers tell you that nobody else knows?)
If, as you said, the creator assumed, then all the other ships simply did not exist or there would be a restriction on use, as with corvettes. The developers gave you the ships, and you can assemble any fleet that you want, this is only the player who decides. So any restrictions you have come up with yourself.

For the first part how about: Games Workshop?
For the second part, you say a player can assemble any fleet they want, but if they want to a assemble a typical long ranged focused Chaos fleet, how are they supposed to do so if those simply do not work at this point? There are no restrictions yeah. But every faction should have its strong and weak points, obviously encouraging the players to play to the faction's strong points, in this case (sigh...) long range, manoeuvrability and ordnance. But they are not strong points right now. Chaos is literally like a worse version of Imperial Navy atm.
This argument is moot if I've ever seen one.

You yourself just named another disadvantage of Macro in front of Lance)) So in reality, the frequency of hitting Macro will be less than what is indicated.
As for accuracy, and what do you want to say? Does the random give Macro any advantages over Lance? It does not give any advantages. If we assume that in one battle it was 70% on average, then in the next battle it will be 50%. And if you add up all the battles you are conducting, then the "Law of Large Numbers" will be used. This once again proves how you want to distort the facts, that would prove your opinion, which is not true.

And your point here? We don't know how exactly the "accuracy" parameter translates into the frequency of hits/misses. It may translate from accuracy straight into the frequency or not.
How is that me trying to distort the facts or prove my opinion, let alone it being a "disadvantage" of macros?

You're trying to change my questioning of how the macro accuracy works in the game into me somehow trying to enforce my opinion on lances. A question that was perfectly neutral and independent on our argument on lances.
I even explicitly included it in a separate post and just as explicitly stated I might be wrong with my observations.

And you dare accuse me of making meaningless, unsubstantiated statements? Ignoring the facts?
And where have I said that “matimatika does not mean anything”? It does. If it is applied correctly. And you always have to take into account that the relevancy of calculations is limited by your initial conditions, and how they pertain to practice.

Yet another case of you being incapable of understanding what is written right in front of your eyes. this is really getting ridiculous. You might want to consider going back to primary school.

@yabatman Yes I agree, chaos should also have an chance of winning. The leaderboards of the last season tells an other story.

"I'm not asking for Chaos to be the strongest" - But Chaos should be stronger than the Imperial Navy. .

Not at all. I'm asking for Chaos lance builds to stand a chance.

Again, in alpha lock on lance spam was disgusting. I asked for it to be toned down. It was. Then all ships got a double hit point buff, then the nerf to crit chance.

Guess I need to learn to play Chaos...

@ahriman

The part after BUT was there to explain that maths represents whatever circumstances and assumptions you predetermine upon making calculations, but the real practical situations are a lot more complex, and simplified maths does not always account for that. Certainly your maths doesn't.

If mathematically the odds are about equal, then in reality the outcome of the battle depends on the skills of the players and microcontrol. But you are trying to highlight this fact, as if it affects negatively on your faction. What nonsense?) This shows only the skill of the players and nothing more. What you do is demagoguery.

Again, you fail at the basic skill of reading with comprehension.

I see that you are compensating for the failure of your opinion with over-conceit. Considering how often you repeat this, you obviously have an inferiority complex. Please behave yourself.

For the second part, you say a player can assemble any fleet they want, but if they want to a assemble a typical long ranged focused Chaos fleet, how are they supposed to do so if those simply do not work at this point?

If you mean a board game, then we are not playing a board game with turn-based battles, this is RTS. We have discussed the comparison of weapons Macro against Lance as well as the ships of the Empire and Chaos, but not aircraft. Do not change the topic.
Aviation is a completely different topic, it should be considered not in a separate faction, but in a comprehensive manner in all factions.

But every faction should have its strong and weak points, obviously encouraging the players to play to the faction's strong points, in this case (sigh...) long range, manoeuvrability and ordnance. But they are not strong points right now.

Why not have strong points? As we found out, Chaos has damage over a long distance, has great speed. You again ignore the facts and make unsubstantiated statements.

And your point here? We don't know how exactly the "accuracy" parameter translates into the frequency of hits/misses. It may translate from accuracy straight into the frequency or not.
How is that me trying to distort the facts or prove my opinion, let alone it being a "disadvantage" of macros?

You keep saying that Macro is stronger than Lance, although mathematically it is the opposite. You raised the topic of incorrect counting of DPS, because I ask you, how does the presence of a random Macro change the situation? Why are my calculations wrong?

You're trying to change my questioning of how the macro accuracy works in the game into me somehow trying to enforce my opinion on lances. A question that was perfectly neutral and independent on our argument on lances.
I even explicitly included it in a separate post and just as explicitly stated I might be wrong with my observations.

When you tried to prove the superiority of Macro over Lance, you raised the topic of random Macro. You argued that the "law of large numbers" is not correct to apply, and now you have changed your mind? If not as a comparison of DPS, then why raise this topic if it is not relevant to this discussion?

And you dare accuse me of making meaningless, unsubstantiated statements? Ignoring the facts?
And where have I said that “matimatika does not mean anything”? It does. If it is applied correctly. And you always have to take into account that the relevancy of calculations is limited by your initial conditions, and how they pertain to practice.

Yes, you continue to ignore the facts again and again, for example, that Chaos has an advantage in range and speed.
Again, I repeat, the fact of the matter is that if the characteristics are equal in math, it all depends on the skill of the players. We found out that according to calculations Chaos has advantages, but you still continue to assert, even now, that Chaos is weak. How can he be weak, not inferior in the characteristics of the Empire, and even surpass him, and the circumstances in battle depends only on the skill of the players? This is absurd.
Our discussion looks like this, you say:

• The ships of Chaos are weak
• Ok, let's count. As we see, Chaos is even the better than Empire
• Mathematics is good, but the result of the battle depends on the conditions.
• Yes, the conditions depend on the skills of the players, so we found out that the ships of Chaos are not weaker, but in something stronger than the Empire, and the outcome of the battle depends only on the skills?
• Not! Although the characteristics of the fleet of Chaos are strong, and the outcome of the battle depends on the player’s skill, therefore Chaos is still weak.
• WAT!

You might want to consider going back to primary school.

Are you trying to insult me? You know, it does not offend me. Because when you write this nonsense, you insult yourself. If so rude you behave in life, I think you have no friends.

@yabatman Yes I agree, chaos should also have an chance of winning. The leaderboards of the last season tells an other story.

Legendary rank was dominated by the imbalance factions themselves, Tau Merchants, Orcs and Necrons, and the game still has balance problems.
One player of Chaos was still at Legendary Rank (player Jamodon), but there was not even one player for the Imperial Navy.

• 77
Posts
• 5992
Views