Faction ranking system

[Nexii]

This is just my own approximation to illustrate:

Gaia   - 100
Cult of Planet - 80
Morgan - 95
Peacekeepers   90
Spartans - 85
Free Drones - 100
Hive - 105
Data Angels - 90
Pirates - 100
CyberCon   - 110
University   - 115
Believers - 85
Usurpers - 130
Caretakers - 115
TOTAL - 1400

Now if someone thought the Believers were underrated in this system, you could +vote them.  This would raise them slightly from 85, and every other faction would get a small decrease.  The total would remain at 1400 always.

[ete]

I think one number is more accurate than rating 'rush' and 'build' equally.  The game favors building over heavy warring generally.

I would argue that it is the players, not the game, which favours heavy building. On average sized maps, assuming there's adequate land connections (otherwise the AI is just terrible, it can't mount a sea invasion), seven players (which means even tech poor factions can often bargain for tech), rush factions are not weak. In 1v1 human games with separate islands on a large map.. builders are going to be king. Because those maps are exactly right for builders.

As for your system:
1. Having a zero sum system does not help much with ~150 custom factions which I'm trying to assess
2. Its significantly more complicated than necessary and running it for large numbers of factions would be effortful, even by my standards.
3. Having a single number means different people are going to have massively different values. For example, you're focusing entirely on building, not much on early killing power.
4. I'm not looking for a transparent democratic system, I'm looking for some input on my initial scores for custom factions, and a system which can be extended to give results on a large number of factions with the smallest effort

[Buster's Uncle]

I would guess at least a small minority, my brother the reverend included, like to play Spartans and a war game - but those sort of temperaments are less likely to gravitate to forum culture...

[Nexii]

I think one number is more accurate than rating 'rush' and 'build' equally.  The game favors building over heavy warring generally.

I would argue that it is the players, not the game, which favours heavy building. On average sized maps, assuming there's adequate land connections (otherwise the AI is just terrible, it can't mount a sea invasion), seven players (which means even tech poor factions can often bargain for tech), rush factions are not weak. In 1v1 human games with separate islands on a large map.. builders are going to be king. Because those maps are exactly right for builders.

As for your system:
1. Having a zero sum system does not help much with ~150 custom factions which I'm trying to assess
2. Its significantly more complicated than necessary and running it for large numbers of factions would be effortful, even by my standards.
3. Having a single number means different people are going to have massively different values. For example, you're focusing entirely on building, not much on early killing power.
4. I'm not looking for a transparent democratic system, I'm looking for some input on my initial scores for custom factions, and a system which can be extended to give results on a large number of factions with the smallest effort

Then you might want to take the approach of putting relative number values to the values of SE settings and other faction modifiers.  You might want to include the important meta interactions that matter (can the faction pop boom Demo/Planned, can they get +2 ECON early).

Building is powerful because it impacts military production.  I believe that even on smaller, more aggressive maps that builder factions usually don't have too much troubles with the momentum factions.  I'm talking human vs human play.  The production and research benefits are just as good for warring as the war-oriented ones.  And there's the added benefit of being able to pull much farther ahead when not warring (i.e. riding a lead). 

[ete]

Then you might want to take the approach of putting relative number values to the values of SE settings and other faction modifiers.  You might want to include the important meta interactions that matter (can the faction pop boom Demo/Planned, can they get +2 ECON early).

For the advanced big formula, that's vaguely what I'm doing. However, that formula is a huge project in itself and I need data to train it with. This is a vastly oversimplified subjective human reliant system. The proper formula will be based purely on the actual faction stats and give vastly more information.

Building is powerful because it impacts military production.  I believe that even on smaller, more aggressive maps that builder factions usually don't have too much troubles with the momentum factions.  I'm talking human vs human play.  The production and research benefits are just as good for warring as the war-oriented ones.  And there's the added benefit of being able to pull much farther ahead when not warring (i.e. riding a lead). 

Perhaps, I am not a MPer, but from what I've seen most games seem to be played on large maps with builder V builder. I'd like to see some examples of small maps with builder v rusher as evidence, since my vs AI play indicates that heavy rushers early game are much more of a threat, and it's easier to rush factions with a rush faction.

[Green1]

This is just my own approximation to illustrate:

Gaia   - 100
Cult of Planet - 80
Morgan - 95
Peacekeepers   90
Spartans - 85
Free Drones - 100
Hive - 105
Data Angels - 90
Pirates - 100
CyberCon   - 110
University   - 115
Believers - 85
Usurpers - 130
Caretakers - 115
TOTAL - 1400

Now if someone thought the Believers were underrated in this system, you could +vote them.  This would raise them slightly from 85, and every other faction would get a small decrease.  The total would remain at 1400 always.

The Believers are always underrated. They are, IMO, the most powerful faction in the game.

Not sure how that translates into numbers.

For one, Miriam gets a powerful starting tech: Social Psych. On Thinker + difficulty, that means while others such as the wussy Zak are stopping production about turn 20 on drone riots or reassigning citizens to doctors, Miriam is rolling.

Second, she gets the + to attack so Morgan and his synthmetal are toast if I go Applied Physics right off.

So what if Zak has impact before I do? I am counting squares and only attacking with my bonus. I get probes and that heathen is next to me, then I really have fun.

I can also match Sparta or Yang on army size.

[Nexii]

AI play isn't really a good metric.  The AI cheats and wars very badly.  Hence it can seem like rusher factions are stronger than they are, when a builder faction could rush just as well.  Try some games against yourself or a friend, 1v1 on a small-ish map (not tiny, that's just silly).  Tell me that University doesn't stomp Believers every time.  The Believers just take way too long to get Impact Rovers. 

There are other factors more important than faction power, like player skill, geography layout, diplomacy, and even luck.  So even in a system where you try to quantify just how good various SE settings are it's going to be subjective.  But perhaps less so as you are evaluating the bonuses as individual merits rather than just how good the faction 'feels'.

[ete]

AI play isn't really a good metric.  The AI cheats and wars very badly.  Hence it can seem like rusher factions are stronger than they are, when a builder faction could rush just as well.  Try some games against yourself or a friend, 1v1 on a small-ish map (not tiny, that's just silly).  Tell me that University doesn't stomp Believers every time.  The Believers just take way too long to get Impact Rovers.

AI play may not be a good metric for human v human play, but likewise human v human play is not a great metric for SP strength. What I'm trying to do here is take both forms of strength into account and get a general measure of power, not overfocus on a single area of strength. I am fully aware that this means that the results will not give accurate high definition stats for any particular area (e.g. human v human), but it will give a reasonable rough overview of the how the faction will match up in a across most likely situations.

There are other factors more important than faction power, like player skill, geography layout, diplomacy, and even luck.  So even in a system where you try to quantify just how good various SE settings are it's going to be subjective.  But perhaps less so as you are evaluating the bonuses as individual merits rather than just how good the faction 'feels'.

In a faction rating formula, obviously I'm not going to be able to take account of player skill or luck. For geography, diplomacy, etc different factions do best with different setups, so the best I can do is figure out their rough power over a range of scenarios and take an approximate average.

For the big formula, the approach is different and will give fine more grained results (for example, you could ask it how fast a faction is going to be researching in the mid game (various research bonuses alongside it's "how much pop/facils is this likely to have by midgame" score), how a faction would fare against a worm rush early on (Psi bonus, Planet SE, Industry, small effect from a few others), or how a faction's info warfare is (economic bonuses for money, probe bonuses, etc) and it gives numbers). As previous stated, that is a very big project labeled: LATER

[Buster's Uncle]

The difference between how a player plays a faction and how the AI does is inevitably a profound one.  Naturally, the AI performance is a statistically measurable thing, if more than a bit tricky.  Humans vary in style and skill and victory goals so wildly, that I don't think that kind of measurement is very doable, yet - a truly useful rating system would cover factions as AI opponents and as playable ones, both, somehow.  No ideas of how to do it, short of somehow recruiting about 40 people to play each faction at least 10 times apiece, rating according to a rigorous standard...

[Green1]

AI play isn't really a good metric.  The AI cheats and wars very badly.  Hence it can seem like rusher factions are stronger than they are, when a builder faction could rush just as well.  Try some games against yourself or a friend, 1v1 on a small-ish map (not tiny, that's just silly).  Tell me that University doesn't stomp Believers every time.  The Believers just take way too long to get Impact Rovers. 

There are other factors more important than faction power, like player skill, geography layout, diplomacy, and even luck.  So even in a system where you try to quantify just how good various SE settings are it's going to be subjective.  But perhaps less so as you are evaluating the bonuses as individual merits rather than just how good the faction 'feels'.

A battle between Zak and Miriam is like the old Secret Wars comic from the 1980s. There was this strong woman named Titania that was taking on Spiderman. Spiderman stomped her, because they fought on open ground with lots of things for spidey to bounce off of and do his spider-thing. Now, put them in a 10 x 10 room where Titania could grab Spidey...

Miriam would own Zak on a small map. You also got to remember, Zak has drones. He is going to be shut down on production. Yes, he has impact, but with his lack of support, our good lady is pumping. He also will not have any infrastructure. Those scout patrols are hanging out on his lawn, destroying improvements and running when something comes out. It is the Lord's work.

Nexxii... the reason why Zak wins vs Miriam is that Miriam is misunderstood. Also, the least played.

[JarlWolf]

Miriam is misunderstood. Also, the least played.

[Geo]

Miriam is misunderstood. Also, the least played.

It's her base graphics, really. 
(in Planetfall, I liked tinkering with her faction alot more)

[Nexii]

The difference between how a player plays a faction and how the AI does is inevitably a profound one.  Naturally, the AI performance is a statistically measurable thing, if more than a bit tricky.  Humans vary in style and skill and victory goals so wildly, that I don't think that kind of measurement is very doable, yet - a truly useful rating system would cover factions as AI opponents and as playable ones, both, somehow.  No ideas of how to do it, short of somehow recruiting about 40 people to play each faction at least 10 times apiece, rating according to a rigorous standard...

This is a really good point.  The AI plays better with the 'momentum' factions - Hive, Believers, Spartans.  The AI plays relatively poorly with the builder factions - pretty much the other four but especially Morgan.  I think this is a big reason people tend to over-estimate the momentum factions. 

I would rate Believers and Cult well at the bottom and University/Aliens much above the rest.  The other 9 base factions are reasonably close to one another in power level.  Free base facilities are much more powerful than minor SE +/-.  It's a bit of a shame because thematically I think Believers and Cult are two of the more creative factions.

[Green1]

 

Some of us believe.....

 

But then again, while I do understand build, I play a different style game. I gather most of the SP guys here are builders.

As far as power, I am going to have to quote Vel's classic tome on Miriam:

The Lord’s Believers:

At a Glance: +2 Support, +1 Probe, -2 Research, -1 Planet; 25% Attack Bonus

General Notes: A superb faction, helped greatly by the Support bonus. The Believers get off to a slow start, but this need not be a crippling disadvantage. One good thing about it is that your bases will be laid out better on your continent, as you will generally have more time to explore before you can start expanding. A different twist on the same advantage Santiago has, with her starting Recon Rover. The planet negative puts you at a slight disadvantage when fighting the natives, unless you attack first, which more than negates your -10% penalty, and the Support boon lets you field more units per base in any event. Also, your attack bonus allows you to work your way to “Trans-elite” troopers, giving you an extra point of movement, and a 25% attack bonus above and beyond what everybody else gets too. Also, the ability to switch to Fundy and render your bases and units immune to subversion is a HUGE advantage! Oh, and remember, Miriam is the only faction in the game that can run Dem and still build a new base with free minerals! (The key advantage here being that you can have comparatively more bases before you start getting drone warnings due to size). A word of warning with this faction: If you are attacked by a psi-force, get as far away from Market as you can. In fact, it would be far and away in your best interest to run green when faced with such an attack, cos if you ARE caught by the worms while running Market, even with trance or empath-assisted troopers, there’s almost no way you can win, especially if those worms are being controlled by Cha’Dawn or Deirdre.

Miriam, the Builder: This might seem like a contradiction in terms, considering the slow start with research and the twenty percent higher tech costs, but in truth, you can offset both of these things with relative ease. Once you get Centauri Ecology, the boost in support enables you to crank out an obscene number of formers, very quickly moving to terraform the entire continent, and making all your bases that much more productive. Not to mention the fact that, as with the Spartans, most people will be content to leave you be if you play a Builder game, and odds are, they’re just breathing a sigh of relief that you’re not attacking them! If you ARE attacked however, your best chance at defending is with an active stance, using pre-emptive strikes to take advantage of your native 25% attack bonus and running Fundy to prevent subversion. Research wise, even when you’re running Fundy, Network Nodes everywhere gives you a net gain of +10% to your research rates. Not nearly the boost it gives others, but then, you’ll only be running Fundy if there’s trouble brewing, otherwise, you’re better served by some other SE choice (Dem springs immediately to mind here). You’re cash is good (ability to run Market), your troops are good, and you can offset the research hit by a program of steady builds and active probe teams to keep up until your infrastructure is in place. The Miriam Builder game is by far the most active of the lot, as she must make early and regular use of probes to keep pace until the infrastructure is in place, but it’s quite easily pulled off.

Also note here, that when you play the Builder’s game with Miriam, you will want to be very careful and specific about when you run Fundy. True, it gives you almost total immunity to enemy probe actions, but it utterly kills your research, regardless of your infrastructure, so use it only when pressed, or when pressing an attack against someone else.

Miriam, the Hybrid: Miriam’s Builder game is so active that there really aren’t many differences between it and the Hybrid game, except that, where the Builder will focus mostly on early game formers, the Hybrid Player will take a few of those “free unit” slots and use them for the building of Prototypes, sending them out hunting in much the same way that the Deirdre Hybrid player uses her native life forms.

Miriam, the Conqueror: Again, like the Spartans, this one’s a no-brainer. Race for Flex and Planetary Networks, switch to Fundy, save your money, find an opponent, infiltrate, probe them to death to get their tech, steal a base and upgrade all the garrisons to best/best, using pre-emptive strikes to defeat the forces sent against you (and continue to subvert them all the while). Build cheap scouts or recon rovers every turn, upgrading them to whatever is needed (remembering that the newly captured base will get a larger than normal share of “free” units), and keep punching your opponent. In the field, with even tech, your forces are VERY hard to beat, especially if you’re running fundy, as they cannot use probe trickery against you, and you get a morale boost too!

From the scriptures....

[JarlWolf]

Some of us believe.....

 

But then again, while I do understand build, I play a different style game. I gather most of the SP guys here are builders.

As far as power, I am going to have to quote Vel's classic tome on Miriam:

The Lord’s Believers:

At a Glance: +2 Support, +1 Probe, -2 Research, -1 Planet; 25% Attack Bonus

General Notes: A superb faction, helped greatly by the Support bonus. The Believers get off to a slow start, but this need not be a crippling disadvantage. One good thing about it is that your bases will be laid out better on your continent, as you will generally have more time to explore before you can start expanding. A different twist on the same advantage Santiago has, with her starting Recon Rover. The planet negative puts you at a slight disadvantage when fighting the natives, unless you attack first, which more than negates your -10% penalty, and the Support boon lets you field more units per base in any event. Also, your attack bonus allows you to work your way to “Trans-elite” troopers, giving you an extra point of movement, and a 25% attack bonus above and beyond what everybody else gets too. Also, the ability to switch to Fundy and render your bases and units immune to subversion is a HUGE advantage! Oh, and remember, Miriam is the only faction in the game that can run Dem and still build a new base with free minerals! (The key advantage here being that you can have comparatively more bases before you start getting drone warnings due to size). A word of warning with this faction: If you are attacked by a psi-force, get as far away from Market as you can. In fact, it would be far and away in your best interest to run green when faced with such an attack, cos if you ARE caught by the worms while running Market, even with trance or empath-assisted troopers, there’s almost no way you can win, especially if those worms are being controlled by Cha’Dawn or Deirdre.

Miriam, the Builder: This might seem like a contradiction in terms, considering the slow start with research and the twenty percent higher tech costs, but in truth, you can offset both of these things with relative ease. Once you get Centauri Ecology, the boost in support enables you to crank out an obscene number of formers, very quickly moving to terraform the entire continent, and making all your bases that much more productive. Not to mention the fact that, as with the Spartans, most people will be content to leave you be if you play a Builder game, and odds are, they’re just breathing a sigh of relief that you’re not attacking them! If you ARE attacked however, your best chance at defending is with an active stance, using pre-emptive strikes to take advantage of your native 25% attack bonus and running Fundy to prevent subversion. Research wise, even when you’re running Fundy, Network Nodes everywhere gives you a net gain of +10% to your research rates. Not nearly the boost it gives others, but then, you’ll only be running Fundy if there’s trouble brewing, otherwise, you’re better served by some other SE choice (Dem springs immediately to mind here). You’re cash is good (ability to run Market), your troops are good, and you can offset the research hit by a program of steady builds and active probe teams to keep up until your infrastructure is in place. The Miriam Builder game is by far the most active of the lot, as she must make early and regular use of probes to keep pace until the infrastructure is in place, but it’s quite easily pulled off.

Also note here, that when you play the Builder’s game with Miriam, you will want to be very careful and specific about when you run Fundy. True, it gives you almost total immunity to enemy probe actions, but it utterly kills your research, regardless of your infrastructure, so use it only when pressed, or when pressing an attack against someone else.

Miriam, the Hybrid: Miriam’s Builder game is so active that there really aren’t many differences between it and the Hybrid game, except that, where the Builder will focus mostly on early game formers, the Hybrid Player will take a few of those “free unit” slots and use them for the building of Prototypes, sending them out hunting in much the same way that the Deirdre Hybrid player uses her native life forms.

Miriam, the Conqueror: Again, like the Spartans, this one’s a no-brainer. Race for Flex and Planetary Networks, switch to Fundy, save your money, find an opponent, infiltrate, probe them to death to get their tech, steal a base and upgrade all the garrisons to best/best, using pre-emptive strikes to defeat the forces sent against you (and continue to subvert them all the while). Build cheap scouts or recon rovers every turn, upgrading them to whatever is needed (remembering that the newly captured base will get a larger than normal share of “free” units), and keep punching your opponent. In the field, with even tech, your forces are VERY hard to beat, especially if you’re running fundy, as they cannot use probe trickery against you, and you get a morale boost too!

From the scriptures....

You've seen my gameplay style right?

I wouldn't exactly call that a builder strategy xD