(03-14-2019, 09:43 AM)Durandal Wrote: Dumping this here pre-emptively before the brigading starts. These were always the intended numbers. The reason this was not noticed during Operation Cathedral is because both bases were bugged and failed to regen entirely.

(03-14-2019, 10:44 AM)Aristaan Wrote: So this comes out to 90k/min for Core 5 w/ 3 commodities, right? (Given 2000x<Core>x<number of ticks per minute>x<number of commodities>3 - 2000x5x3x3) Making it 2.97 hours per percentage of regeneration. While a single cerb heavy battleship can deliver a net damage per minute of 130,909, which means you can accomplish a siege in 203 hours on a Core 5 base with a single ship. That means you're draining about 1% every 2 hours - which means your recovery ratio is still 3:2 - you spend 3 hours repairing a single person's 2 hours of work. Using a much more reasonable number, 3 - and you get a net damage per minute of 572,727, reducing your workload to a mere 46 hours - times 3 of course, or 138 man-hours, giving you a percent of damage every 83 man-minutes, instead of every 2 hours - decaying your work to recovery ratio 3:1.38. Now a bit more extreme - 2,119,090 net damage per minute with 10 battleships, making your siege only 12 hours long. During these same conditions, you're looking at a recovery of 24 minutes of recovery per minute of siege, however, still maintaining a 3.6:1 workload ratio. Obviously this would become more ludicrous as you add more battleships.

This isn't even taking into account the possibility of better equipment for the job. (Full siege cannon battleships deal 6750 DPS vs a Cerb battleship's 3682 against POB's, making 1 siege cannon battleship worth 1.83 cerb battleships - easily making your 10 players worth 18 - reducing your siege time from 12 hours to 6.5 hours, and making your work ratio a catastrophic 4.6:1 - or basically a percentage every 3.9 minutes. The base then has to repair for 3 hours for every 39 man-minutes you spend. If you want a pure timescale ratio - it's pretty easy, add a zero - 46:1. 46 hours of repair for every hour of siege.

Now I have my own opinions on workload ratios, so I'll let that rest - what I would like to know is what the design philosophy was at a the time to decide that a 3+:1 ratio in what would be considered a reasonable siege, if 10-15 players would be considered reasonable, you're basically fighting unwinnable conditions on one side, as the contrary was true with the previous system.

Also, an update on weapon platforms? Are they supposed to be invulnerable, is killing them intended, and if they stop firing and are ignored intentionally in light of the ease of siege, is it still exploiting?

Edit: Also with such ludicrous recovery times, wouldn't it also be prudent to create a siege cooldown within the rules? Right now - fail a siege, re-declare, finish the siege - that's a problem. If a POB lived with 5% health, it would take 11 days 21 hours to repair to full. If you can re-declare, you could just finish it off like defending the base successfully with these odds was completely meaningless. Also this would likely need to be per base, as split sieges may become an issue, siege with faction 1, then 2, stagger forever.

Ex: Should a base survive a siege, that base may not have another declaration against it for 2 weeks. Sieges that are declared during the recovery period will become effective after the 2 weeks is over.

(03-14-2019, 12:18 PM)SnakThree Wrote: POBs there, POBs here. While some factions still don't have access to Battleships and are absolutely unfit to siege anything but Core 1. So how about we start where from the beginning, of allowing all criminals to field Battleships and then maybe worry about POB going boom there or here? After all, how many POB sieges have been successful against properly supplied AND defended POB?