BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

The place to discuss balance changes for future versions of the game.
(Master releases & 3.X)

Re: BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

Postby Per » 21 Nov 2017, 20:55

Hironaru wrote:Thanks for the heads up NoQ. I plan to use the wiki re-balance page to track the overall progress and other rogue suggestions, if I can get permission to do so from Vex or Per. :3

I think the person you need to convince is Berserker Cyborg. As far as I am concerned, he is in charge of the campaign.

As regards our wiki, I would not recommend using it. It is in a sad state, and I am slowly moving stuff out of it, so that we can one day just shut it down, so that we have one less thing to worry about not maintaining. Better to use the forum, or github page, or some external wiki.

Best of luck in your efforts!
Per
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Warzone 2100 Team Member
 
Posts: 3690
Joined: 03 Aug 2006, 19:39

Re: BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

Postby Berserk Cyborg » 21 Nov 2017, 22:06

As I said before I like this initiative. If someone wants to do the hard work of making the campaign balance better then I am all for that progress. Some weapons never get a chance to be of any use (flamer, Inferno, rocket pod, Mini rocket launcher and more) and some others are too good (once you get assault gun it will take the role of anti-personnel, anti-tank, and artillery). I would say it is too late to put changes of this magnitude in the official repo so do it as a mod for now.

Lasers and machine-guns need a separate modifier category. The current modifiers for anti-personnel works well for lasers.

There will be a need of overpowered AI artillery rockets/missiles and howitzers structures. They no longer have the impressive damage they once had and makes half of the Beta campaign far too easy.
User avatar
Berserk Cyborg
Code contributor
Code contributor
 
Posts: 415
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 19:56

Re: BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

Postby Bethrezen » 22 Nov 2017, 01:53

For example, presenting the machine gun guard tower upgrade at the first base in cam1a instead of the third base, will take the edge off of D type players who initially have no defensive structures to start with, while also preventing skirmish attacks from the enemy when amateur O or Z type players underestimate their unit strength after encountering the scav guard towers and lose their initial 4 tanks.

If the first and third upgrades were switched, people wouldn't get the mg bullets upgrade and its two subsequent upgrades until after they get flamer at the second base, encouraging them to try flamers to test their effectiveness. Currently, the mg upgrades are the first presented in normal, and can be upgraded 2 more times, which kind of breaks the mission flow.


Small correction currently this is the order that you get tech on alpha 01

at the first enemy held oil well you get the following tech: Hardened MG bullets, APDSB MG bullets, APDSB MG bullets mk2

At the first base and the second oil well you get the following tech: Flamer turret

At the Second base you get the following tech: Mg tower

At the final base you get the following tech: Engineering, Tank trap, Mobile Repair tech

With regards to what you are suggesting I would in fact advocate something different at the first oil well give players the artefact for

Engineering, Tank trap, Mobile Repair tech

Then move the MG upgrades to the final base and leave the rest where it is. why I hear you ask simple really if you want to defend your base you are actual better not to use Machine gun towers.

I know that might sound counter intuitive but there is some reasoning behind it, for a start units will get stronger as they rank up, not only will they deal more damage but they will take less damage as well. Second towers can easily be by passed mobile defences can't, Third mobile units are more resilient especially when paired with a couple of mobile repair units and mobile repair units can be made to repair them selves by setting them to hold position which makes for a more sturdy and efficient defence.

This is in fact how I defend my base on alpha 1 and 2 I set about 5 or 6 units to do or die and then i have them hold position in a choke point so the computer can't get around them I then pair them with a couple of mobile repair units which are also set to do or die and hold position.

I've tried using towers in the past and found them to be ineffective they just get blown up to easy even when I leave a couple of builders near by to repair them, and what I have found is that its actually more efficient to use units as guards because i have found when using units i only need about 5 or 6 on average especially if those units have some rank on them, but when using towers I need about twice that number, but more importantly scav's out range your units and towers which renders towers useless.

To be honest in the entire game I only use turrets to defend my base on the final mission of the beta campaign and on the level where nexus mind controls your units and structures on gamma campaign other then that I never use them instead I'll just use mobile artillery and vtols to bomb the opposition into submission long before they get anywhere near my base and I'll have mobile AAA units in place to shoot down there VTOLs if they try to attack my base that way.

one suggestion i would make if you are going to switch round when you get various bits of tech is move the pepper pot mortar to say alpha 08 the same time you get the bombard because currently you get the pepper pot mortar around the same time you get ripple rockets which means that its automatically obsolete as soon as you collect it but on alpha campaign the pepper pot mortar might actually be useful for a few missions before you upgrade to ripple rockets or howitzers on beta campaign certainly it would be useful on alpha 12 and would make clearing out all there turrets much faster as bunker busters can't hit most of there turrets.

Also, IIRC, busters could not target non building units in the original. I feel like that's more of a bug, and it should be brought to the attention of the bug group.


I'm not so sure about although to be sure that I'd need to load up v1.10 the last release made by pumpkin and test if that is in fact the case because I'm fairly sure bunker busters can auto fire at units on the original game.
Bethrezen
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 389
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

Postby Hironaru » 22 Nov 2017, 05:47

Bethrezen wrote:
I've tried using towers in the past and found them to be ineffective they just get blown up to easy even when I leave a couple of builders near by to repair them, and what I have found is that its actually more efficient to use units as guards because i have found when using units i only need about 5 or 6 on average especially if those units have some rank on them, but when using towers I need about twice that number, but more importantly scav's out range your units and towers which renders towers useless.

To be honest in the entire game I only use turrets to defend my base on the final mission of the beta campaign and on the level where nexus mind controls your units and structures on gamma campaign other then that I never use them instead I'll just use mobile artillery and vtols to bomb the opposition into submission long before they get anywhere near my base and I'll have mobile AAA units in place to shoot down there VTOLs if they try to attack my base that way.

one suggestion i would make if you are going to switch round when you get various bits of tech is move the pepper pot mortar to say alpha 08 the same time you get the bombard because currently you get the pepper pot mortar around the same time you get ripple rockets which means that its automatically obsolete as soon as you collect it but on alpha campaign the pepper pot mortar might actually be useful for a few missions before you upgrade to ripple rockets or howitzers on beta campaign certainly it would be useful on alpha 12 and would make clearing out all there turrets much faster as bunker busters can't hit most of there turrets.


Your play-style demographic is O. Reactive offensive by definition is the pooling of units for defense, and reacting to enemy attacks after they are defeated. I value your thoughts on the current weaknesses provided by turrets, and am glad that you agree that mg upgrade needs to be moved somewhere further down the road.

With the beta based technologies, I kind of want to establish a baseline of balance between all weapons and their effectiveness as they are presented mission by mission first, and then evaluate if certain technologies should be moved between missions. That balance between technologies will include upgrades to the flamer, as well as perhaps the towers for segment cam1a. :3

As far as providing engineering first, I was thinking of using engineering as a prerequisite of one of the mg upgrades to stunt its growth. It makes sense that to engineer better bullets, you should have something called "engineering" anyway right?
Do, or do not. There is no try.
-yoda
User avatar
Hironaru
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 35
Joined: 11 Jun 2017, 10:10

Re: BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

Postby Hironaru » 22 Nov 2017, 06:28

Let me focus the attention to flamers for a little bit.

There are a couple things that come to mind when I consider what a flamer should be, or could be. We could double the firing rate, and halve the damage.or increase the aoe radius.. We could even abandon the current flamer and make it into a flamer that constantly sweeps flames over an area, that has a limited amount of fuel per "canister" and then has to recharge to replace the canister.

Ideas abound, so lets see what people think about it :3
Do, or do not. There is no try.
-yoda
User avatar
Hironaru
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 35
Joined: 11 Jun 2017, 10:10

Re: BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

Postby Lord_Kane » 22 Nov 2017, 12:10

Hironaru wrote:Let me focus the attention to flamers for a little bit.

There are a couple things that come to mind when I consider what a flamer should be, or could be. We could double the firing rate, and halve the damage.or increase the aoe radius.. We could even abandon the current flamer and make it into a flamer that constantly sweeps flames over an area, that has a limited amount of fuel per "canister" and then has to recharge to replace the canister.

Ideas abound, so lets see what people think about it :3


I perfer it as a cannon type weapon, but I think it needs a range and fire rate increase but halve the damage and only increment the damage and fire rate per upgrade
User avatar
Lord_Kane
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 83
Joined: 24 Nov 2016, 21:51

Re: BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

Postby Hironaru » 22 Nov 2017, 18:50

Lord_Kane wrote:
Hironaru wrote:Let me focus the attention to flamers for a little bit.

There are a couple things that come to mind when I consider what a flamer should be, or could be. We could double the firing rate, and halve the damage.or increase the aoe radius.. We could even abandon the current flamer and make it into a flamer that constantly sweeps flames over an area, that has a limited amount of fuel per "canister" and then has to recharge to replace the canister.

Ideas abound, so lets see what people think about it :3


I perfer it as a cannon type weapon, but I think it needs a range and fire rate increase but halve the damage and only increment the damage and fire rate per upgrade


You guys and I have kind of the same idea on what should happen to flame technology. BOOM! Your wish is my command. I will release our very first adjustments when I wake up, and after I fine tune just a few more things with the flamer upgrades. Behold section CAM1A!

I have corrected a few errors in the code for the tower (it was putting a heavy machine gun on the machine gun tower lul). I also created an entirely new weapon based off of the MG it had, and relabeled it as "MG1-Tower" so I could put the accuracy and range higher than what I did with the tank mg.

I have increased the mounted machine-gun firing rate by 20%, Reduced the damage by 30%, Increased the velocity of the rounds by 50%, reduced the accuracy to 50%, and very very slightly reduced the range of it from a value of 768 to 750. These values will be returned with redesigned upgrades available at the 2nd base (3rd base, kinda) that will not only increase damage, but velocity and range as well, which will also apply to mg towers.

And of course by popular suggestion, flamer got a huuuge overhaul! Its now called Flamethrower (because flamer has other connotations and we don't want the scavs to get the wrong idea). The flamethrower fires a canister that explodes into a mist of volatile gases that ignite oxygen in the air sporadically as well as any material that has oxygen in it (like the cotton in a scavs prized spaceballs teeshirt). The initial shell damage has been reduced to 20, The base aoe radius has been increased from 32 to 100, the number of explosions has increased from a value of 1 to 100, the aoe lingering time has been reduced to 30.

The range has been increased slightly to 500, the accuracy has been doubled to 80% up from 40%, and hp has been increased by 10 points to 50 (enough to increase life slightly, but still low enough that scavs will attack it first over mg's). Oh yeah, and the rate of fire has been slightly more than doubled.

The focus is to maintain a balance between the flamethrowers ability to roast people out of buildings, and the machine guns ability to mow people down. Likewise, you will notice that the slight reductions to mg damage affect your ability to destroy a brick and metal building with bullets. Surprise, logic! Maybe you will want to try out the new hot thing everyone's doing.

-----

Tomorrow I will slightly reduce the scav mg range of the cam1a and cam1b units (but not towers), redesign the flamer upgrades and release the first test files for everyone to try. After everyone has given their assessment, adjustments will be made based on popular opinion, over and over until everyone is generally satisfied with the results. The test will include Cam1A and Cam1B, everything up to the transport. :D

Project BOMB hype!
Do, or do not. There is no try.
-yoda
User avatar
Hironaru
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 35
Joined: 11 Jun 2017, 10:10

Re: BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

Postby Bethrezen » 23 Nov 2017, 04:48

As far as providing engineering first, I was thinking of using engineering as a prerequisite of one of the mg upgrades to stunt its growth. It makes sense that to engineer better bullets, you should have something called "engineering" anyway right?


That’s a bit of a weird one because engineering to me means better buildings and better construction techniques which allow you to construct building faster and to a higher standard so they can take more punishment before being destroyed engineers don’t have anything to do with making better ammo that would be the job of an armourer some one who specialises in the development of weapons and armour, so I can't say that is a good idea.

There are a couple things that come to mind when I consider what a flamer should be, or could be. We could double the firing rate, and halve the damage, or increase the aoe radius.. We could even abandon the current flamer and make it into a flamer that constantly sweeps flames over an area, that has a limited amount of fuel per "canister" and then has to recharge to replace the canister.


As far as the flamer goes I would look at the real world crocodile tanks that where used in WW2 for inspiration, so first off I'd increase the range to match machine guns then I'd either increase the damage or increase the rate of fire or I'd split the buff between damage and rate of fire either way you go about it you should achieve roughly the same outcome and that is to make the flamer comparable in performance to machine guns

And of course by popular suggestion, flamer got a huuuge overhaul! Its now called Flamethrower (because flamer has other connotations and we don't want the scavs to get the wrong idea). The flamethrower fires a canister that explodes into a mist of volatile gases that ignite oxygen in the air sporadically as well as any material that has oxygen in it (like the cotton in a scavs prized spaceballs teeshirt). The initial shell damage has been reduced to 20, The base aoe radius has been increased from 32 to 100, the number of explosions has increased from a value of 1 to 100, the aoe lingering time has been reduced to 30.


That's an interesting idea but you do realise there is a weapon like that already the
Incendiary Mortar

Now I'll grant you the Incendiary Mortar is artillery not a direct fire weapon but what you are suggesting here sounds an awful lot like the Incendiary Mortar, so I'm not really sure if we need a replica of that certainly you could look at possibly adding a version of the Incendiary Mortar to the campaign which would do as you suggest lobbing a flaming barrel of oil that explodes on impact leaving a patch of fire smilier to how the vtol phosphor bomb bay works.

As I already said before I would keep the flamer as an approximation of the real world equivalent the crocodile tank used by the allies during WW2.
Bethrezen
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 389
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

Postby Hironaru » 23 Nov 2017, 11:45

Bethrezen wrote:That’s a bit of a weird one because engineering to me means better buildings and better construction techniques which allow you to construct building faster and to a higher standard so they can take more punishment before being destroyed engineers don’t have anything to do with making better ammo that would be the job of an armourer some one who specialises in the development of weapons and armour, so I can't say that is a good idea.


As far as the term engineer is concerned, there are many different types of engineers. In the military sense, engineers have historically developed many different systems; from tanks and improved aircraft to ammunition and weapons systems as well. A few well known military engineering firms include Lockheed Martin, the RAF engineering division, Raytheon, General Dynamics, BAE systems, etc. And it is a fascinating and highly competitive field of engineering. :D

Now, as far as the application is concerned, I think there is some merit to the idea, if the function is changed. If the technology is available at the beginning of the mission (Say, on the ground just past the oil derrick, hidden initially by the fog of war) it could be made as a logical next step towards the machinegun tower. That could do a lot to add validity to engineering as a whole by providing even more base structures to D type players at the beginning of the game, which is absolutely required. I'm going to have to talk to cyborg and other people about how to place the artifact on the ground, but it can be done and we should test it.

Bethrezen wrote:As far as the flamer goes I would look at the real world crocodile tanks that where used in WW2 for inspiration, so first off I'd increase the range to match machine guns then I'd either increase the damage or increase the rate of fire or I'd split the buff between damage and rate of fire either way you go about it you should achieve roughly the same outcome and that is to make the flamer comparable in performance to machine guns.


Unfortunately the ww2 flamethrower tank, also known as the "Churchill Crocodile" was a tank with a flamethrower accessory made to be fitted on a Churchill Mk VII tank (so it was basically already a cannon tank). It fired a relatively short constant stream of pyrophoric fluid that was focused in a uniform stream, and limited by the tanks turning mobility. Modern versions of flame throwing involve white phosphorous rounds like these https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owQI9NDR2ro or (illegal) air dispersion of pyrophoric gasses like Chlorine Triflouride.

Historically, conventional flamethrowers have retained about 1/3 of the range of conventional machine-guns, which would be too massive of a nerf to flames to make them really worth anything. I feel that between all of these characteristics when attempting to determine what pumpkin studios had wanted to do when it designed this weapon concept, that it is glaringly obvious to me that the tank is firing pyrophoric rounds (specifically both with the aoe effect rather than the linear effect, and the fact that it has to reload in order to fire.)

Bethrezen wrote:
That's an interesting idea but you do realise there is a weapon like that already the
Incendiary Mortar

Now I'll grant you the Incendiary Mortar is artillery not a direct fire weapon but what you are suggesting here sounds an awful lot like the Incendiary Mortar, so I'm not really sure if we need a replica of that certainly you could look at possibly adding a version of the Incendiary Mortar to the campaign which would do as you suggest lobbing a flaming barrel of oil that explodes on impact leaving a patch of fire smilier to how the vtol phosphor bomb bay works.
[/quote]

You hit the nail on the head when determining what I was trying to do. White phosphor tank rounds and white phosphor artillery basically do the same thing; Dispersing flaming hot material over an area. its not too far of a stretch between both technologies, and brings both the incendiary mortar and the flamer into context with each-other, and kind of unifies the idea of flame technology in the game.

-----

I really like the idea of putting engineering in the beginning as a requisite for towers the more I think about it, so I am going to try to get ahold of someone who can teach me how to apply the artifacts to the ground if I dont figure it out before then in flame :3
Last edited by Hironaru on 24 Nov 2017, 08:10, edited 1 time in total.
Do, or do not. There is no try.
-yoda
User avatar
Hironaru
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 35
Joined: 11 Jun 2017, 10:10

Re: BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

Postby Bethrezen » 23 Nov 2017, 14:03

Unfortunately the ww2 flamethrower tank, also known as the "Churchill Crocodile" was a tank with a flamethrower accessory made to be fitted on a Churchill Mk VII tank (so it was basically already a cannon tank). It fired a relatively short constant stream of pyrophoric fluid that was focused in a uniform stream, and limited by the tanks turning mobility. Modern versions of flame throwing involve white phosphorous rounds like these https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owQI9NDR2ro or (illegal) air dispersion of pyrophoric gasses like Chlorine Triflouride.

Historically, conventional flamethrowers have retained about 1/3 of the range of conventional machine-guns, which would be to massive of a nerf to flames to make them really worth anything. I feel that between all of these characteristics when attempting to determine what pumpkin studios had wanted to do when it designed this weapon concept, that it is glaringly obvious to me that the tank is firing pyrophoric rounds (specifically both with the aoe effect rather than the linear effect, and the fact that it has to reload in order to fire.)


that's true but for are purposes that is the only real world equivalent to a flame thrower tank, which is why i suggested looking at that for inspiration.

As far as what a flame thrower tank should look like I'd take a look at the dragon tank from C&C Generals because when you say flame thrower tank to me this is the image that comes to mind, you will need to fast forward the video a bit though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbZJ7ZRIUbA

Also here is an image of a real life flame thrower tank PM-1 Flame Tank (1949) again this matches with the C&C version.

Also while I'm on the subject of flame throwers something else you will have to look at dealing with is the friendly fire issue because when I'm using a squad of say machine guns friendly fire isn't an issue but when using a squad of flame thrower tanks around 50% of the damage i was receiving was self inflicted which shouldn't really be happening because one would assume that flame thrower tanks would be covered in flame retardant armour so they wont get damage by there own flames.

also if you want to know about the Crocodile Wikipedia is a grate source of information.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill_Crocodile

I really like the idea of putting engineering in the beginning as a requisite for towers the more I think about it, so I am going to try to get ahold of someone who can teach me how to apply the artifacts to the ground if I dont figure it out before then in flame :3


having engineering as a prerequisite for building MG defence towers is fine because that is in keeping with pumpkins definition of engineering while you may be right about the definition of engineering applying to more than just construction of structures the issue i have with that is that pumpkins definition of engineering was much narrower and was never required for doing weapon upgrades it was only required for making better buildings, constructing those buildings faster and coming up with new structure types, therefore it should probably stay that way.

For corroboration of this assertion you can look at the WZ tech tree now I'll grant you the tech tree is for skirmish and not campaign and the info is a bit outdated, but for the purpose of this discussion it makes the point that engineering was never required for doing weapon upgrades.

You hit the nail on the head when determining what I was trying to do. White phosphor tank rounds and white phosphor artillery basically do the same thing; Dispersing flaming hot material over an area. its not too far of a stretch between both technologies, and brings both the incendiary mortar and the flamer into context with each-other, and kind of unifies the idea of flame technology in the game.


perhaps the problem there though is that you are effectively removing the flamer tank from the game because what you are preposing is a cannon tank that fires incendiary rounds and that is not not a flame thrower, the definition of a flame thrower is a device that expels under pressure a burning stream of fuel, aka the C&C dragon tank, and if you look at how the flamer is implemented in game it is clear that pumpkin uses this definition.

certainly i wouldn't be against adding incendiary rounds to the game to help cannon tanks inflict more damage, but i cant really agree to what you are preposing for the flamer because that is not a flame thrower.
Last edited by Bethrezen on 23 Nov 2017, 15:34, edited 3 times in total.
Bethrezen
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 389
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

Postby Hironaru » 23 Nov 2017, 15:28

I need to take care of some thanksgiving (US Holiday) stuff and spend time with family, so I wont be able to push a release for the mod for cam1a and cam1b today, but it will be soon! so soon e.e

Feel free to talk amongst yourselves and give me some good feedback in the mean time ^^
Do, or do not. There is no try.
-yoda
User avatar
Hironaru
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 35
Joined: 11 Jun 2017, 10:10

Re: BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

Postby Hironaru » 25 Nov 2017, 09:59

Quick Update,

Were going to go with the constant stream flamethrower tank design and see what everyone thinks. Both shell and flamethrower models work, but after doing the flamethrower version I really liked how it felt. There has been numerous scav building classifications that changed to complement the transition of mg to flamer, as well as tweaks and leveling between early scav mg damage types, range and even animation associations (now both scav buggy and scav ground-fighters have smaller looking bullets).

Enemy and Player mg towers received a boost in range due to their elevation (cause logic) compared to their counterparts (still less than vanilla for enemy mg towers), and the enemy flame-towers have *also* been changed to meet the new flamer classifications, which makes them not-useless, and actually kind of intimidating on cam1a base 4. :D

Technologies have been overhauled and reclassified to accomplish the same basic effects of the originals once researched, but have also had other factors added to them such as range and speed, which will cause the first mg upgrade to bring the players range and ability level with the scav's range. Engineering has been relocated to the first upgrade point, stripped of the repair turret (which is now its own upgrade) and Machinegun Tower has been added to the end of it to allow for D type players to have access to relevant base defenses earlier. Restricting repair turret until the end of cam1a also encourages players to research flamethrowers at research point 2 for their likely failed assault on base 3.

-----

I will post what I have so far after I square everything away, and we can all finally test the first revision of cam1a. After it has been assessed, we will see how everyone feels about it generally and revisit it again and again until either there is a conceptual stalemate between everyone, or a consensus that things are relatively well balanced. Then we will progress to the next section, as outlined in the project guidelines.
Do, or do not. There is no try.
-yoda
User avatar
Hironaru
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 35
Joined: 11 Jun 2017, 10:10

Re: BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

Postby Hironaru » 25 Nov 2017, 16:50

Here it is!

Don't forget, the source-forge version of warzone2100 won't work with these changes.
Go here to get the latest files: http://buildbot.wz2100.net/files/master/

Once you have installed the portable version of warzone2100, navigate to the mods file and create a file called "autoload"
Download and extract this file inside of autoload:
base.zip
cam1a-rev1
(35.5 KiB) Downloaded 12 times


Your File-path should look like warzone2100-master-#/mods/base/
You will want to extract the files, in some cases the .wz conversion diddn't work, plus all advancements from here will be built on the previous revisions; therefore when you get a new revision, just copy the extracted base folder over the old one in mod, and overwrite all the files it asks you to. :3

-----

Now your ready to contribute your input to our very first revision, cam1a!
After you have played through it, come back and lets discuss what you thought about it. :)
Last edited by Hironaru on 26 Nov 2017, 13:33, edited 4 times in total.
Do, or do not. There is no try.
-yoda
User avatar
Hironaru
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 35
Joined: 11 Jun 2017, 10:10

Re: BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

Postby alfred007 » 25 Nov 2017, 17:46

There is an easier way to use your mod. Add the folders with your changed files in a zip-file that you give the ending .wz. This file gets saved in the campaign folder of the mods folder and then you can use it as a mod like it is described in the FAQ. And in that way it is not necessary to use a separate folder or overwrite the original base-file. I added your changes into a mod that you can use like describe above.
Attachments
Updated-Campaign-Hiro.wz
(35.28 KiB) Downloaded 16 times
alfred007
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 214
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Germany

Re: BOMB - Balance Overhaul Management Beta

Postby Hironaru » 26 Nov 2017, 02:42

The above instructions have been changed to use a variation Alfred's method. -edit

Please note that the base file I uploaded in the previous post has been updated since its initial post, and is the most current revision. If you have played enough to get the first artifact, and that artifact is engineering, you have installed the mod correctly :)

-----

This will allow us to replace mod files without replacing the original game files as we move forward much more easily.

Vielen Dank, Alfred. :3 What do you think of the changes, by the way?
Do, or do not. There is no try.
-yoda
User avatar
Hironaru
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 35
Joined: 11 Jun 2017, 10:10

PreviousNext

Return to Balance