Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

The projects speaking tube.
Add your two cents if you want to.
Bethrezen
Regular
Regular
Posts: 584
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Bethrezen » 09 Jun 2018, 13:05

not sure if this is an issue with the mod of with this particular version of the master that I'm using but i have been noticing that on occasion the game will crash on reload here the crash dump

Code: Select all

-------------------

Error occurred on Saturday, June 9, 2018 at 12:00:09.

Program: C:\Documents and Settings\<user name>\Desktop\Warzone 2100_portable-master\warzone2100_portable.exe(warzone2100)
Command line: "C:\Documents and Settings\<user name>\Desktop\Warzone 2100_portable-master\warzone2100_portable.exe" 
Version: Version: master ab17b9b, Built:Feb  4 2018
Distributor: buildbot
Compiled on: Feb  4 2018 05:32:34
Compiled by: GCC 4.9.3
Compiled mode: Release build
Executed on: Sat Jun 09 11:20:47 2018

Pointers: 32bit

Compiled against PhysicsFS version: 2.0.3
Running with PhysicsFS version: 2.0.3

Misc Data:
[11:20:47]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:20:47]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:20:47]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:20:47]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:20:47]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:20:47]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:20:47]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:20:47]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:20:47]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:20:47]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:20:48]Video Mode 800 x 600 (fullscreen)
[11:20:48]OpenGL Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
[11:20:48]OpenGL Renderer: GeForce 9500 GT/PCIe/SSE2
[11:20:48]OpenGL Version: 3.3.0
[11:20:48]GLEW Version: 1.12.0
[11:20:48]OpenGL GLSL Version : 3.30 NVIDIA via Cg compiler
[11:20:48]OpenAL Device Name: OpenAL Soft
[11:20:48]OpenAL Vendor: OpenAL Community
[11:20:48]OpenAL Version: 1.1 ALSOFT 1.16.0
[11:20:48]OpenAL Renderer: OpenAL Soft
[11:20:48]OpenAL Extensions: AL_EXT_ALAW AL_EXT_DOUBLE AL_EXT_EXPONENT_DISTANCE AL_EXT_FLOAT32 AL_EXT_IMA4 AL_EXT_LINEAR_DISTANCE AL_EXT_MCFORMATS AL_EXT_MULAW AL_EXT_MULAW_MCFORMATS AL_EXT_OFFSET AL_EXT_source_distance_model AL_LOKI_quadriphonic AL_SOFT_block_alignment AL_SOFT_buffer_samples AL_SOFT_buffer_sub_data AL_SOFT_deferred_updates AL_SOFT_direct_channels AL_SOFT_loop_points AL_SOFT_MSADPCM AL_SOFT_source_latency AL_SOFT_source_length
[11:20:48]Using Backend: SDL
[11:20:48]Using language: System locale
[11:20:53]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:20:53]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:20:53]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:20:53]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:20:57]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2S
[11:21:06]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:06]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:06]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:06]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:06]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:06]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:06]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:06]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:08]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2S
[11:21:25]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:25]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:25]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:25]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:25]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:25]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:25]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:25]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:28]Current Level/map is SUB_1_1
[11:21:39]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:39]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:39]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:39]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:40]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2S
[11:21:57]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:57]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:57]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:57]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:21:58]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2
[11:25:24]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:25:24]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:25:24]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:25:24]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:25:24]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:25:25]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:25:25]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:25:25]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:25:27]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2S
[11:25:33]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:25:33]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:25:33]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:25:33]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:25:33]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2
[11:31:25]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:31:25]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:31:25]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:31:25]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:31:26]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:31:26]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:31:26]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:31:26]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:31:28]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2S
[11:31:33]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:31:33]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:31:33]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:31:33]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:31:34]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2
[11:36:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:36:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:36:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:36:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:36:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:36:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:36:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:36:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:36:10]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2S
[11:36:16]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:36:16]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:36:16]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:36:16]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:36:16]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2
[11:37:10]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:37:10]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:37:10]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:37:10]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:37:10]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:37:10]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:37:10]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:37:10]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:37:12]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2S
[11:37:18]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:37:18]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:37:18]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:37:18]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:37:18]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2
[11:38:02]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:38:02]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:38:02]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:38:02]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:38:03]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:38:03]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:38:03]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:38:03]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:38:05]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2S
[11:38:11]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:38:11]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:38:11]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:38:11]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:38:11]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2
[11:51:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:51:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:51:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:51:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:51:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:51:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:51:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:51:08]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:51:10]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2S
[11:51:16]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:51:16]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:51:16]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:51:16]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:51:17]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2
[11:57:55]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:57:55]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:57:55]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:57:55]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:57:55]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:57:55]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:57:55]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:57:55]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[11:57:57]Current Level/map is SUB_1_2
[12:00:07]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[12:00:07]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[12:00:07]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[12:00:07]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[12:00:07]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[12:00:07]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[12:00:07]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz
[12:00:07]mod: campaignMaster + rules + camBalance.wz


C:\Documents and Settings\<user name>\Desktop\Warzone 2100_portable-master\warzone2100_portable.exe caused an Access Violation at location 7c910cce in module C:\WINDOWS\system32\ntdll.dll Reading from location 00000000.

Log message: info    |11:36:16: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Scripts not initialized yet
Log message: info    |11:36:16: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Assert in Warzone: qtscript.cpp:1364 (scriptsReady), last script event: '<none>'
Log message: info    |11:36:16: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Scripts not initialized yet
Log message: info    |11:36:16: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Assert in Warzone: qtscript.cpp:1364 (scriptsReady), last script event: '<none>'
Log message: info    |11:37:18: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Scripts not initialized yet
Log message: info    |11:37:18: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Assert in Warzone: qtscript.cpp:1364 (scriptsReady), last script event: '<none>'
Log message: info    |11:37:18: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Scripts not initialized yet
Log message: info    |11:37:18: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Assert in Warzone: qtscript.cpp:1364 (scriptsReady), last script event: '<none>'
Log message: info    |11:38:11: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Scripts not initialized yet
Log message: info    |11:38:11: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Assert in Warzone: qtscript.cpp:1364 (scriptsReady), last script event: '<none>'
Log message: info    |11:38:11: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Scripts not initialized yet
Log message: info    |11:38:11: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Assert in Warzone: qtscript.cpp:1364 (scriptsReady), last script event: '<none>'
Log message: info    |11:51:16: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Scripts not initialized yet
Log message: info    |11:51:16: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Assert in Warzone: qtscript.cpp:1364 (scriptsReady), last script event: '<none>'
Log message: info    |11:51:16: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Scripts not initialized yet
Log message: info    |11:51:16: [triggerEventSeen:1364] Assert in Warzone: qtscript.cpp:1364 (scriptsReady), last script event: '<none>'
Log message: info    |11:57:56: [loadLabels:985] Unit 340 belonging to player 7 not found from label group_1
Log message: info    |11:57:56: [loadLabels:985] Assert in Warzone: qtscriptfuncs.cpp:985 (psObj), last script event: '<none>'
Log message: info    |12:00:08: [loadLabels:985] Unit 340 belonging to player 7 not found from label group_1
Log message: info    |12:00:08: [loadLabels:985] Assert in Warzone: qtscriptfuncs.cpp:985 (psObj), last script event: '<none>'

Registers:
eax=00000000 ebx=10d00000 ecx=1d4fd748 edx=10d00278 esi=1d4fd740 edi=1d4fd75c
eip=7c910cce esp=0022e448 ebp=0022e668 iopl=0         nv up ei pl nz na pe nc
cs=001b  ss=0023  ds=0023  es=0023  fs=003b  gs=0000             efl=00010202

Call stack:
7C910CCE  C:\WINDOWS\system32\ntdll.dll:7C910CCE

alfred007
Trained
Trained
Posts: 435
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by alfred007 » 09 Jun 2018, 14:04

I admit that rebuilding units all the time can be a bit annoying. And I'm always looking for a strategy where I have to rebuild my units as less often as possible. So what I do is in alpha 02 I build my squad for alpha 03. At the beginning of alpha 03, I recycle all my not necessary combat units and build 10 HMG tanks during alpha 03. At the beginning of alpha 04, I recycle the squad from alpha 03 and send the HMG squad to alpha 04. After I captured the mortar artifact I build my mortar squad for alpha 05. I don't use halftracks in alpha 05. To prevent my units to get butchered by the NP I place a lot of repair units between my sensor unit and the NP units. This way the NP attacks the repair units and I can relaxed destroy the NP units from the distance. So I have only to wait at the beginning of alpha 06 that all my units get to rebuild. All others get build during the action of a level.

Getting the factory module during alpha 04 is an interesting idea. I'm not sure if it would be then too easy for the player to repel the first NP attack in alpha 06. Alpha 06 is a level where you have a lot of time and I think the player should be forced to find a creative solution for the problem to repel the first NP attack while he has to upgrade his units. And he has to repel some scavenger attacks too. But after rebalancing alpha 05 we should test it and see what we think about it.

I looked into the script of alpha 05 and found three things that should be changed in my eyes:

1) The scavenger garrison is still with the standard machine gun. This should be the heavy machine gun variant
2) Not all Scavengers that the factory produce are the heavy machine gun variant.
3) If you give the Scavengers the third machine gun damage upgrade the NP should get it also.

I add the changed script for implementation if you agree.

@Berserk Cyborg I'm wondering something, in one of your posts you have agreed to me that we can use the third damage upgrade in alpha 04. But you implemented just two damage upgrades in alpha 04. What changed your mind?
Attachments
cam1-3.js
(6.45 KiB) Downloaded 10 times

Bethrezen
Regular
Regular
Posts: 584
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Bethrezen » 09 Jun 2018, 16:15

alfred007 wrote:I admit that rebuilding units all the time can be a bit annoying. And I'm always looking for a strategy where I have to rebuild my units as less often as possible. So what I do is in alpha 02 I build my squad for alpha 03. At the beginning of alpha 03, I recycle all my not necessary combat units and build 10 HMG tanks during alpha 03. At the beginning of alpha 04, I recycle the squad from alpha 03 and send the HMG squad to alpha 04. After I captured the mortar artifact I build my mortar squad for alpha 05. I don't use halftracks in alpha 05. To prevent my units to get butchered by the NP I place a lot of repair units between my sensor unit and the NP units. This way the NP attacks the repair units and I can relaxed destroy the NP units from the distance. So I have only to wait at the beginning of alpha 06 that all my units get to rebuild. All others get build during the action of a level.
what i tend to do is alpha 1 build a squad of machine-gunners, attack the first base and get the repair turret and flame turret and once researched build 2 mobile repair units and get my machine-gunners repaired then build 2 more repair units and 18 flamers, while i wait for them to build I'll take my machine-gunners and knock off all the scav turrets, I'll then fall back and hold position in the canyon entrance right where the scav's second base is and i'll just let my units keep killing the scav's till they all rank up to regular, i'll then send them back to base, and replace them with the flamers and allow them to start getting some experience, till I'm down to about 5 minutes on the clock I'll then knock off the scav's bases but I'll leave the power generator standing, to give me a chance to do the remaining research, at which time i'll all send all but 1 of the flames back to base and then I'll end the level.

on alpha 02 I'll leave the machine-gunners to guard my base, and I'll use the 18 flamers and 4 repair units and take out the first 2 bases, I'll then upgrade the machine-gunners to twin machine-gunners and I'll send them to the south and have them hold just beyond the range of there turrets and then I'll have the flamers remove the turrets and then I'll park the twin machine-gunners out side the entrance of the scav base till the twin machine-gunners all reach professional rank and then again I'll replace them with the flamers and let them gain a bit more experience till I'm down to about 5 minutes at which time knock off the base get the artefact build the power generates and send my away team to the LZ so they are ready to get on the drop ship, I'll then remove the last turrets and end the level.

alpha 3 I'll usually use 4 flamers 4 twin machine-guns and 2 repair units and then I'll sweep round the map till there is nothing left, and then head back to the LZ but I'll hold just out side the LZ till the research is done and while I'm waiting I'll start upgrading my twin machine-guns to heavy machine guns and then I'll end the level, when I'm down to about 60 seconds on the clock.

Alpha 04 I'll usually just use my alpha 3 away team, call in the other 10 members and start moving in the mean time I'll be finishing off converting my twin machine-guns to heavy machine guns if I didn't have enough time to finished that on the previous level and then I'll bring them in along with the other 2 repair units and I'll have them guard my LZ, while squad 2 finishes off sweeping the map, once mortar research is ready I'll build 9 mortars and a scanner and bring them in and then I'll move them to the west and let them start bombing the scav's as they come out the factory in the mean time I'll be building another 9 mortars and a scanner I'll then bring them in and I'll park them in the same place as the other half of the squad and again I'll let them keep bombing the scav's till all the research is done and I'm down to about 2 minutes on the clock at which time I'll finish the scav base and return to the LZ and end the level

The start of alpha 5, I'll recycle all my units and then I'll build 18 heavy machine-gun half tracks, and 2 mobile repair units on half tracks and launch and while I'm doing the opening parts of alpha 5, I'll be building 18 mortars on wheels and 2 scanners on half tracks and 2 more repair units on half tracks and then I'll start brining in the mortars and get my ambush ready, next I'll attack the new paradigm base and them let them run face first into the fire of 36 units which will usually flatten most of there squad in a matter of seconds at that point it's simply a matter of removing the turrets with the mortars while the heavy machine-guns protect the mortars, and then it's time to sit and wait for 15/20 minuets while i do all the research, typically I'll get about 95% of the research complete before I run out of time and have to end the level and while that is going on I'll be rebuilding squad 3 in preparation for the start of alpha 06

Alpha 06 usually I'll just take all 3 of my squads which is 36 heavy machine-gun half tracks and 18 mortars on wheels set them to retreat on medium damage and I'll crush the new paradigms initial rush with overwhelming firepower, at which point I'll hold near the entrance of the canyon build 2 repair towers and I'll start the process of upgrading my units.
Getting the factory module during alpha 04 is an interesting idea. I'm not sure if it would be then too easy for the player to repel the first NP attack in alpha 06. Alpha 06 is a level where you have a lot of time and I think the player should be forced to find a creative solution for the problem to repel the first NP attack while he has to upgrade his units. And he has to repel some scavenger attacks too. But after rebalancing alpha 05 we should test it and see what we think about it.
true but the reality is attacking my base is suicide anyway because even with only viper bodies and half-tracks the new paradigms initial rush doesn't stand a chance I don't care how tough there units are they have so much fire coming down on them that they are toast and this is only going to get worse now that cannons are actually useful, so they will be getting attacked by 36 cannons and 18 mortars instead of 36 heavy machine-gun and 18 mortars, or possibly 18 heavy machine-gun 18 cannons and 18 mortars id have to see which works better, because I haven't really tested cannons much so far.

so realistically whither I have medium bodies or not at the start of alpha 6 is in the grand scheme of things largely irrelevant from a game play perspective.

Being able to upgrade to medium bodies before alpha 6 starts is more of a quality of life change more than anything since I'm having to sit around for 15/20 minutes anyway to get all the research from alpha 5 done, being able to upgrade my units while I'm doing the research is simply streamlining what I would otherwise be doing on alpha 6 anyway, yes that does make there initial rush easer to deal with but that can be compensated for by making there initial rush stronger, now I realise this may well cause some issue for less experienced players, if they are not expecting it and fail to take the time on alpha 5 to upgrade but to be honest that can't really be helped, because even without making the initial rush stronger you can still get had off quite easily if you are not prepared for the start of alpha 06.
I looked into the script of alpha 05 and found three things that should be changed in my eyes:

1) The scavenger garrison is still with the standard machine gun. This should be the heavy machine gun variant
2) Not all Scavengers that the factory produce are the heavy machine gun variant.
3) If you give the Scavengers the third machine gun damage upgrade the NP should get it also.

I add the changed script for implementation if you agree.
I'd also perhaps also perhaps add another scav base on the hill to the south of the new paradigm base the one where the new paradigm scanner is, and I'd set the trigger zone for that base on the ramps that lead up to that little hill and at the entrance of the new paradigm base so that the base wont trigger till you either go up the hill or you enter the new paradigm base that just helps to keep things a little more fair and it gives the player something to do while waiting on there research to complete, because it's tricky to leave the default scav factory operational due to where it's situated but a second scav base on the hill would have no such issue.

either that or you could move the artefact from the new paradigm tank factory into the research centre which would mean that the player could leave the tank factory standing which again would give the player something to do while waiting for research to finish.

another possibility if you wanted to amp up the challenge a bit more than what you would get from adding a scav base is to add another new paradigm tank factory and again to help keep things fair maybe have that factory only trigger when the player enters the new paradigm base.

alfred007
Trained
Trained
Posts: 435
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by alfred007 » 09 Jun 2018, 17:01

In alpha 01 I place my units at the canyon entrance too to gain some experience. And in alpha 02 I'm doing it to the extreme by placing two machine gun tanks protected by two repair units near the assembly points of the scavenger factories and let them kill one scavenger after the other. This results in 20 veteran units at the end of alpha 02.
At the beginning of alpha 03, I recycle all my combat units and produce 4 twin machine gun tanks and 4 flamer tanks like you. During alpha 03 I produce 10 HMG tanks and two sensors.
At the beginning of alpha 04, I recycle my alpha 03 squad and send the HMG tanks to alpha 04. I let the western scavenger base standing and do the same I did in alpha 02. After I captured the mortar artifact I produce 20 mortars and fly them in. I attach 4 mortars to one sensor and let them destroy the scavengers from the western base. The second sensor moves the eastern way north with the rest of the mortars. This way I can gain 2 points for experience with one killed scavenger.
In alpha 05 I recycle 2 of the HMG tanks, produce 2 more mortars and send 8 HMG tanks and two repair units to the NP. There I activate the reinforcements and destroy the scavengers in the southwest. Then I wait for my two sensors and my mortars and let them destroy the rest. For preparation for alpha 06, I build a line of sensors in the southeast during alpha 02. I placed the delivery points of my factories near there and produce one sensor tank, 5 mortars and 9 trucks during the research time of alpha 05.
At the beginning of alpha 06, I close the gap in the line of sensors and the mortars are destroying every unit the NP or the scavengers send to me. The trucks repair the damaged sensors and build some repair facilities. So I can hold the enemy units far away from my base and have enough time to recycle my units. From alpha 04 on I never use more than 32 units so that the experience didn't get shared between too many units. The next additional unit I produce is a sensor tank for alpha 12.

I like the idea of a second scavenger factory for alpha 05. Maybe we can let this factory produce units with cannons and/or rockets but then with a longer throttle than the factories that only produce heavy machine gun scavenger. I start again the discussion if we give the scavenger cannons the damage values of the light cannon of the player. From a logical point, it makes no sense to give them individual values and they would gain less than 10% more damage (base damage per minute of the light cannon is 600, of the scavenger cannons, is 560).

Bethrezen
Regular
Regular
Posts: 584
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Bethrezen » 09 Jun 2018, 18:46

From alpha 04 on I never use more than 32 units so that the experience didn't get shared between too many units.
Like you I generally don’t use more that 2 squads at a time which is 36 units, although I will usually have more that 2 squads available so that I have some options for how I want to handle a given level, which frees me from having to mess around recycling and rebuilding units constantly, at certain key points I'll do that because for example I've just gotten some new tech like medium bodies but as a rule I try to avoid recycling and rebuilding units unless necessary as in the case of getting stronger bodies on alpha 5 for example or getting stronger weapons in the case of lancers on alpha 06
I start again the discussion if we give the scavenger cannons the damage values of the light cannon of the player. From a logical point, it makes no sense to give them individual values and they would gain less than 10% more damage (base damage per minute of the light cannon is 600, of the scavenger cannons, is 560)
To decide that we'd need to take a look at what the damage of the cannon is like at the end of alpha 05 start of alpha 06 because we may well need to stagger the damage upgrades like we did for the flamer and machine-guns to stop cannons becoming to strong to quickly, which is of course going to inform how strong the scav cannons should be, if we want the damage of the scav's cannons to increase in strength as the player gets stronger, again this would probably need to be an incremental process because obviously with the scav's grater numbers and faster production if scav cannons are to strong then that’s going to cause the same sort of problems that we saw with the machine-guns when the damage was increased to much and to quickly, the other thing that we'll need to take into account of from alpha 6 onward is that we will no longer be facing the scav's alone we will also be facing the new paradigm as well, so again if the scav's get to strong to quick then we are going to have some real problems

Another variable we are going to have to consider is that the scav units should probably be weaker then the new paradigm equivalents otherwise fighting the scav's will be little different then fighting the new paradigm in which case we may as well remove the scav's, but of course doing that would change alpha campaign quiet significantly so that should probably be avoided.

Alpha 05
Ok so just had a quick go at alpha 05 and one of the immediate things I noticed is that even with the third damage upgrade flamers are still doing almost nothing to the new paradigm turrets but then that’s not a grate surprise

The flamer only has a damage per minute value of 714 when you multiply the flamers damage by it's rate of fire although admittedly this doesn't include the damage done by the dot but even so it's still nowhere near the level of damage inflicted by the heavy machinegun.

If you multiply the heavy machineguns damage by it's rate of fire you come out with a damage per minute value of 3210

So from alpha 05 onwards if the flamer is going maintain its usefulness it's going to need some serious buffs because right now its only really useful against scav's

I'm aware that the new paradigm bodies have a higher fire resistance so I'm not really expecting flamers to work well again there units or at least no there heavier ones anyway but they should still work on there structures

As for the cannons I think the rate of fire for the light cannon needs to be quicker, I can understand the medium and heavy cannons having a slower rate of fire because the shells are bigger and heavier and therefore take more effort to shift around which equates to a longer reload time but the light cannon should have a fairly fast rate of fire since the shells are not particularly big or heavy and therefore don't require a lot of effort to shift around which should equate to a faster rate of fire particularly if you have several rounds loaded into a magazine instead of reloading the cannon 1 shell at a time like you would with the medium or heavy cannons.

here is a youtube vid which demonstrates what the fire from the light 40mm cannon should look like

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuBQyjNcm4U

as you can see from this vid the rate of fire for the light cannon is far to slow, although i realise that that increasing the the rate of fire will likely necessitate reducing the damage of each round to stop the light cannon becoming massively overpowered.

had a look around and found this
40 mm L/70
New Serbian hybrid SPAAA 40mm and SAM – PASARS 16.
Brazilian Marine Corps shooting a Bofors L/70.

By the end of World War II, jet aircraft had so increased the speed of attack that the Bofors simply could not get enough rounds into the air to counter the aircraft before it had already flown out of range. In order to effectively engage these threats, the gun would have to have longer range and a higher rate of fire, thereby increasing the number of rounds fired over the period of an engagement. Bofors considered either updating the 40 mm, or alternately making a much more powerful 57 mm design. In the end they did both.

The new 40 mm design used a larger 40 × 364R round firing a slightly lighter 870 g shell at a much higher 1,030 m/s (3,379 fps) muzzle velocity. The rate of fire was increased to 240 rounds per minute (4.0 rounds per second), similar to the German Flak 43. Additionally, the carriage was modified to be power-laid, the power being supplied by a generator placed on the front of the carriage. The first version was produced in 1947, accepted in 1948 as the "40 mm lvakan m/48", and entered Swedish service in 1951. Additional changes over the years have improved the firing rate first to 300 rpm (5.0 rounds per second), and later to 330 rpm (5.5 rps).
Source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bofors_40_mm_gun

so doing a quick calculation the rate of fire on the light cannon should be between 240 to 330 rounds per minute but of course that's faster then the heavy machine-gun which would be overpowered so if we do

240 / 4 = 60
330 / 4 = 82.5

we come up with a more reasonable rate of fire of between 60 to 82 rounds per minute of course if that's deemed to be to much then perhaps that could be halved to give a rate of fire of between 30 to 41 rounds per minute

User avatar
Berserk Cyborg
Code contributor
Code contributor
Posts: 615
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 19:56

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Berserk Cyborg » 09 Jun 2018, 19:21

Bethrezen wrote:not sure if this is an issue with the mod of with this particular version of the master that I'm using but i have been noticing that on occasion the game will crash on reload here the crash dump
Yeah, I get those too sometimes. Guess I get driver crashes also. But only in this one instance when loading a save with this mod.

Code: Select all

Call Stack:
6E202436  C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\atioglxx.dll:6E202436  DrvPresentBuffers
6E1CB138  C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\atioglxx.dll:6E1CB138  DrvPresentBuffers
6E2020A6  C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\atioglxx.dll:6E2020A6  DrvPresentBuffers
6E202F55  C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\atioglxx.dll:6E202F55  DrvPresentBuffers
6E20320C  C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\atioglxx.dll:6E20320C  DrvPresentBuffers
6E1C2D42  C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\atioglxx.dll:6E1C2D42  DrvPresentBuffers
6E1C29F5  C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\atioglxx.dll:6E1C29F5  DrvPresentBuffers
6E1C289E  C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\atioglxx.dll:6E1C289E  DrvPresentBuffers
6E1A5F92  C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\atioglxx.dll:6E1A5F92  DrvPresentBuffers
6D8DF3FF  C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\atioglxx.dll:6D8DF3FF  DrvPresentBuffers
00C7E39F  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  _imd_load_level  c:\projects\warzone2100\lib\ivis_opengl\imdload.cpp:742
00C7FEC4  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  iV_ProcessIMD  c:\projects\warzone2100\lib\ivis_opengl\imdload.cpp:991
00C80F5D  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  tryLoad  c:\projects\warzone2100\lib\ivis_opengl\imdload.cpp:76
00C8058D  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  modelGet  c:\projects\warzone2100\lib\ivis_opengl\imdload.cpp:106
00C35B56  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  statsGetIMD  c:\projects\warzone2100\src\stats.cpp:260
00C342AB  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  loadWeaponStats  c:\projects\warzone2100\src\stats.cpp:415
00ACFC4B  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  bufferSWEAPONLoad  c:\projects\warzone2100\src\data.cpp:163
00CC3FD2  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  resLoadFile  c:\projects\warzone2100\lib\framework\frameresource.cpp:547
00CC6081  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  res_parse  c:\projects\warzone2100\build\lib\framework\resource_parser.ypp:119
00CC39A5  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  resLoad  c:\projects\warzone2100\lib\framework\frameresource.cpp:206
00B58C3C  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  levLoadData  c:\projects\warzone2100\src\levels.cpp:759
00B16302  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  gameLoadV  c:\projects\warzone2100\src\game.cpp:3765
00B1508E  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  gameLoad  c:\projects\warzone2100\src\game.cpp:3047
00B198AB  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  loadGameInit  c:\projects\warzone2100\src\game.cpp:1663
00B5F649  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  initSaveGameLoad  c:\projects\warzone2100\src\main.cpp:856
00B5FCF0  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  mainLoop  c:\projects\warzone2100\src\main.cpp:1006
00CACAFE  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  wzMainEventLoop  c:\projects\warzone2100\lib\sdl\main_sdl.cpp:2263
00B60C9E  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  realmain  c:\projects\warzone2100\src\main.cpp:1340
00CE3CEB  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  main_getcmdline  c:\projects\warzone2100\vcpkg\buildtrees\sdl2\src\sdl-release-2.0.8\src\main\windows\sdl_windows_main.c:162
00CE3BE5  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  WinMain  c:\projects\warzone2100\vcpkg\buildtrees\sdl2\src\sdl-release-2.0.8\src\main\windows\sdl_windows_main.c:203
00CE30CF  C:\Users\kjeff\Local-Programs\Warzone 2100 Portable-master\warzone2100.exe  __scrt_common_main_seh  f:\dd\vctools\crt\vcstartup\src\startup\exe_common.inl:283
75498484  C:\WINDOWS\System32\KERNEL32.DLL:75498484  BaseThreadInitThunk
77DD2EC0  C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\ntdll.dll:77DD2EC0  RtlValidSecurityDescriptor
77DD2E90  C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\ntdll.dll:77DD2E90  RtlValidSecurityDescriptor
alfred007 wrote: I looked into the script of alpha 05 and found three things that should be changed in my eyes:

1) The scavenger garrison is still with the standard machine gun. This should be the heavy machine gun variant
2) Not all Scavengers that the factory produce are the heavy machine gun variant.
3) If you give the Scavengers the third machine gun damage upgrade the NP should get it also.

I add the changed script for implementation if you agree.

@Berserk Cyborg I'm wondering something, in one of your posts you have agreed to me that we can use the third damage upgrade in alpha 04. But you implemented just two damage upgrades in alpha 04. What changed your mind?
Added. I don't think there are heavy rocket templates so I changed them to machine-guns. As for the latter, I think Alpha 5 is a good reality check for less experienced players and they'll fail pretty hard on it and not make the same mistake later.

Added a scavenger base in the south corner which use cannons and rockets for the factory. Also, I added the ability for New Paradigm reinforcements to arrive from the north valley area on Insane but have not tested it (it works, you'll just need to uncomment the queue in the enableNP function in the cam1-3 script).

I'll start working on the flamer next.
camBalance.wz
(102.67 KiB) Downloaded 11 times

User avatar
WZ2100ModsFAn
Trained
Trained
Posts: 267
Joined: 15 Apr 2018, 17:25
Location: United States.

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by WZ2100ModsFAn » 09 Jun 2018, 19:32

Berserk Cyborg wrote:
alfred007 wrote: I looked into the script of alpha 05 and found three things that should be changed in my eyes:

1) The scavenger garrison is still with the standard machine gun. This should be the heavy machine gun variant
2) Not all Scavengers that the factory produce are the heavy machine gun variant.
3) If you give the Scavengers the third machine gun damage upgrade the NP should get it also.

I add the changed script for implementation if you agree.

@Berserk Cyborg I'm wondering something, in one of your posts you have agreed to me that we can use the third damage upgrade in alpha 04. But you implemented just two damage upgrades in alpha 04. What changed your mind?
Added. I don't think there are heavy rocket templates so I changed them to machine-guns. As for the latter, I think Alpha 5 is a good reality check for less experienced players and they'll fail pretty hard on it and not make the same mistake later.

Added a scavenger base in the south corner which use cannons and rockets for the factory. Also, I added the ability for New Paradigm reinforcements to arrive from the north valley area on Insane but have not tested it (it works, you'll just need to uncomment the queue in the enableNP function in the cam1-3 script).

I'll start working on the flamer next.
camBalance.wz
hmgs are op they should be tmgs instead
Apologies if i dont see your post
central time usa

alfred007
Trained
Trained
Posts: 435
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by alfred007 » 09 Jun 2018, 19:33

Bethrezen wrote:
I start again the discussion if we give the scavenger cannons the damage values of the light cannon of the player. From a logical point, it makes no sense to give them individual values and they would gain less than 10% more damage (base damage per minute of the light cannon is 600, of the scavenger cannons, is 560)
To decide that we'd need to take a look at what the damage of the cannon is like at the end of alpha 05 start of alpha 06 because we may well need to stagger the damage upgrades like we did for the flamer and machine-guns to stop cannons becoming to strong to quickly, which is of course going to inform how strong the scav cannons should be, if we want the damage of the scav's cannons to increase in strength as the player gets stronger, again this would probably need to be an incremental process because obviously with the scav's grater numbers and faster production if scav cannons are to strong then that’s going to cause the same sort of problems that we saw with the machine-guns when the damage was increased to much and to quickly, the other thing that we'll need to take into account of from alpha 6 onward is that we will no longer be facing the scav's alone we will also be facing the new paradigm as well, so again if the scav's get to strong to quick then we are going to have some real problems

Another variable we are going to have to consider is that the scav units should probably be weaker then the new paradigm equivalents otherwise fighting the scav's will be little different then fighting the new paradigm in which case we may as well remove the scav's, but of course doing that would change alpha campaign quiet significantly so that should probably be avoided.
I'm just talking about giving the scavenger cannons a slightly higher base damage. To avoid that the scavengers become too strong we can give them less cannon damage upgrades. Also, we can manage what units they produce and how fast. This would be the same what we did giving the scavengers machine guns with the same values the player have.
Bethrezen wrote:Another variable we are going to have to consider is that the scav units should probably be weaker then the new paradigm equivalents otherwise fighting the scav's will be little different then fighting the new paradigm in which case we may as well remove the scav's, but of course doing that would change alpha campaign quiet significantly so that should probably be avoided.
The scavengers will always be weaker because of their significant lower hitpoints in comparison with the units of the NP.

For a comparison between the damage of machine guns and flamers, you have also pay attention to the weaponmodifier and the structuremodifier. If you look into weapnmodifier.json you will see that flamers have a lower modifier than machine guns against tanks no matter if they are wheeled, halftracked or tracked. They have a higher modifier against legged enemies and hover. And when you look into structuremodifier.json you will see that flamers are useful against bunker, medium and soft structures, but nearly without any use against hard structures. And already a wall is a hard structure. So it's no wonder that flamers are only useful against scavengers and their buildings and useless against the NP.

If you want a higher fire rate for the light cannon we can change the damage to 10 and the firepause also to 10, giving the light cannon the same base damage per minute as with the current values. Because the heavy machine gun has a firepause of 8 we can't go lower for logical reason.

Bethrezen
Regular
Regular
Posts: 584
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Bethrezen » 09 Jun 2018, 19:56

For a comparison between the damage of machine guns and flamers, you have also pay attention to the weaponmodifier and the structuremodifier. If you look into weapnmodifier.json you will see that flamers have a lower modifier than machine guns against tanks no matter if they are wheeled, halftracked or tracked. They have a higher modifier against legged enemies and hover. And when you look into structuremodifier.json you will see that flamers are useful against bunker, medium and soft structures, but nearly without any use against hard structures. And already a wall is a hard structure. So it's no wonder that flamers are only useful against scavengers and their buildings and useless against the NP.
true enough but I'll leave that to Berserk Cyborg to sort out.
If you want a higher fire rate for the light cannon we can change the damage to 10 and the firepause also to 10, giving the light cannon the same base damage per minute as with the current values. Because the heavy machine gun has a firepause of 8 we can't go lower for logical reason.
What we could perhaps do with the light cannon is increase the rate of fire but stagger the damage upgrades because currently you get all 3 cannon damage upgrade back to back and giving the light cannon all 3 damage upgrades plus increasing it's rate of fire to more accurately reflect the real world equivalent would probably be a bit much but if we stagger the damage upgrades over a few levels like we did with the flamers and machine-guns we can make the rate of fire faster without the damage getting completely out of control and becoming way to strong.

I'm also wondering about whether we should move the medium cannon to a later level given that the medium cannon more or less makes the light cannon automatically obsolete.

alfred007
Trained
Trained
Posts: 435
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by alfred007 » 09 Jun 2018, 19:59

WZ2100ModsFAn wrote:hmgs are op they should be tmgs instead
What hmg do you mean? Hmg of the player or of the scavengers?

If you are talking about the players hmg's, just wait until you have to fight against the NP. There you will see that they are not overpowered. Against scavenger in alpha 04 maybe, but not generally.

Bethrezen
Regular
Regular
Posts: 584
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Bethrezen » 09 Jun 2018, 20:03

hmgs are op they should be tmgs instead
depends on what difficulty level you are talking about HMG scav's might be overpowered on the easier difficulty levels but not for insane because insane is supposed to be for experienced players, plus you have to keep in mind that even if they do have HMGs on the easier difficulties they will do a less damage on the easier difficulty levels, because damage scales having said this however if things prove to hard for players on the easier difficulties we can always scale things back a bit but that is something that can be addressed later once we are done balancing for insane, because before we can do the easier difficulty levels we need to finish with insane and establish a base line.

don't fret once we are done with insane we'll look at the easier difficulties and address any issue players are having if they find it to hard.

alfred007
Trained
Trained
Posts: 435
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by alfred007 » 09 Jun 2018, 20:46

Bethrezen wrote:What we could perhaps do with the light cannon is increase the rate of fire but stagger the damage upgrades because currently you get all 3 cannon damage upgrade back to back and giving the light cannon all 3 damage upgrades plus increasing it's rate of fire to more accurately reflect the real world equivalent would probably be a bit much but if we stagger the damage upgrades over a few levels like we did with the flamers and machine-guns we can make the rate of fire faster without the damage getting completely out of control and becoming way to strong.

I'm also wondering about whether we should move the medium cannon to a later level given that the medium cannon more or less makes the light cannon automatically obsolete.
Getting all three damage upgrades back to back could be really a little bit much. But before we make a decision we should look at the end of alpha 05 what damage per minute the light cannon have. If we move the medium to a later level we have to think about that you get the lancer in alpha 06. And if you want to give the player a useful alternative to the lancer you need the medium cannon. Maybe with all three damage upgrades. Otherwise, the player will use the lancer again until the end of alpha mission. I think we should also stagger the damage upgrades for lancers. But this is a decision when we move on to alpha 06.

User avatar
WZ2100ModsFAn
Trained
Trained
Posts: 267
Joined: 15 Apr 2018, 17:25
Location: United States.

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by WZ2100ModsFAn » 09 Jun 2018, 22:00

is there an upload limit? i can't upload anything that is 9 MB
Apologies if i dont see your post
central time usa

Bethrezen
Regular
Regular
Posts: 584
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Bethrezen » 10 Jun 2018, 01:49

is there an upload limit? i can't upload anything that is 9 MB
not sure although i have had issues with uploading larger files in the past, maybe try ziping it up with 7zip and use ultra compression mode to make it as small as possible, what is it you are trying to upload video ? if so then vids need to be ziped up because last time i tried to upload an mp4 for example it just says mp4 is not allowed.
Getting all three damage upgrades back to back could be really a little bit much. But before we make a decision we should look at the end of alpha 05 what damage per minute the light cannon have.
here is what the stats for the light cannon look like after getting all 3 damage upgrades.

Image

so if the light cannon is going to have a rate of fire nearly as fast as the heavy machine gun then having a damage value of 76 is probably a bit much.

now the heavy machine-gun has a damage value of 30, so I reckon that a damage value of around 40 to 50 would be a reasonable starting point for the the light cannon i mean the default damage value of the light cannon without any upgrades is 40 and after 1 damage upgrade that increases to 52 so that is right in the ball park, and i reckon if we increase the rate of fire to say 60 but only give 1 damage upgrade then the damage per minute should end up just about the same as the heavy machine-gun

light cannon
52 x 60 = 3120 damage per min

heavy machine-gun
30 x 107 = 3210 damage per min

now obviously this doesn't take in to account the modifiers so depending on the modifiers a damage value of 52 and a rate of fire of 60 might still be a little strong but it gives us a reasonable starting point and then we can see how it is and decide from there if any tweaking is necessary.
If we move the medium to a later level we have to think about that you get the lancer in alpha 06. And if you want to give the player a useful alternative to the lancer you need the medium cannon.
humm true... although i guess if we differentiate the medium and light cannons both would have there specific uses the light cannon being better for example agent swarms of cyborgs for example due to its faster rate of fire where the medium cannon with its slower rate of fire but bigger damage per shot would be better vs stronger units
I think we should also stagger the damage upgrades for lancers. But this is a decision when we move on to alpha 06.
That's probably something that is true with all weapons that get all 3 of there damage upgrades back to back but that's something that can be dealt with when we get that far, better not to jump the gun and just deal with this incrementally as we progress through the campaign.

User avatar
WZ2100ModsFAn
Trained
Trained
Posts: 267
Joined: 15 Apr 2018, 17:25
Location: United States.

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by WZ2100ModsFAn » 10 Jun 2018, 02:10

Bethrezen wrote:
alfred007 wrote:Getting all three damage upgrades back to back could be really a little bit much. But before we make a decision we should look at the end of alpha 05 what damage per minute the light cannon have.
here is what the stats for the light cannon look like after getting all 3 damage upgrades.

Image

so if the light cannon is going to have a rate of fire nearly as fast as the heavy machine gun then having a damage value of 76 is probably a bit much.
alfred007 wrote:If we move the medium to a later level we have to think about that you get the lancer in alpha 06. And if you want to give the player a useful alternative to the lancer you need the medium cannon.
humm true... although i guess if we differentiate the medium and light cannons both you have there specific uses the light cannon being better for example agent swarms of cyborgs for example due to its faster rate of fire where the medium cannon with its slower rate of fire but bigger damage per shot would be better vs stronger units
so what if you were to tone the upgrade down a little bit

no one has pushed any changes yet to master
Apologies if i dont see your post
central time usa

Post Reply