Jammer balance

The place to discuss balance changes for future versions of the game.
(Master releases & 3.X)
Post Reply
User avatar
Berserk Cyborg
Code contributor
Code contributor
Posts: 795
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 19:56

Jammer balance

Post by Berserk Cyborg » 29 Dec 2018, 06:01

It has been decided that jammer must be disabled in the base game given the difficulty players are having when adapting to it. So, I removed all jammer related research, and thus its availability in the base game without cheats/mods, with commit 6c5435de1fea4f4d3e5b2fdf2cadd7a0e6f623cf.

Post here your ideas on how to fix it so that it may see a return in a future release.

To help start this discussion I will pose a few questions that may help to identify problems with the jammer:

1. What, specifically, should one expect the jammer do and not do?
2. What is wrong with its current behavior and why?
3. What should "counter" the jammer?

User avatar
andrvaut
Trained
Trained
Posts: 150
Joined: 02 Jan 2016, 12:44

Re: Jammer balance

Post by andrvaut » 29 Dec 2018, 13:51

1) Jammer can turn off artillery target and minimap area. jammer should not affect direct attack weapons.
2) There are no means in the game to resist a jammer. There are no means in the game to resist a jammer. And the jammer completely changes the mechanics of the collision of units and gives an unfoundedly big advantage.
2) Now satellite link disable effect jammer. But it opens too late.
vaut ΣΑ [GN], ru streamer.
Tournaments channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzusNa-54ydodtSz2TdHFww

EnoshimaJunko
New user
Posts: 1
Joined: 29 Dec 2018, 14:14

Re: Jammer balance

Post by EnoshimaJunko » 29 Dec 2018, 14:38

The jammer almost spoils the whole game. If it is and return to the game only with the ability to resist it. For example to make any sensor which is investigated on the same branch. As well researched before the jammers, or after it. And of course to force a silencer and sensor against its depended on quality their research.
With respect Enoshima Junko. The participant of the tournaments.

User avatar
xNEXTx
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 25
Joined: 10 Sep 2018, 22:07
Location: Russia

Re: Jammer balance

Post by xNEXTx » 29 Dec 2018, 18:05

I fully agree that the jammer is breaking the balance game.
At the moment the jammer is nothing to oppose.
1. He can really cover from artillery fire, but should not interfere with the army to conduct combat operations.
2. When using a jammer game loses its unique tactics and control units. All sit within range of interference and are afraid to stick his nose. The game boils down to - whose army (meat) will be stronger. It is no interest.
If the jammer available is the first player and the second it is not - this is the end of the game and no matter what advantage in battle was the second.
3. What should "counter" the jammer?
My answer is:
Do need a jammer at all in the game?
In the 3.1.5 version of people play fine without it.
Seriously, there must be another sensor capable of blocking the jammer completely. This sensor must be investigated at the same time.
4. Make opportunity to set a limit before the battle or disable the use of this technology in the settings.

P. S. I am against the jammer. This technology is not suitable for this game.

Per
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Posts: 3768
Joined: 03 Aug 2006, 19:39

Re: Jammer balance

Post by Per » 07 Jan 2019, 20:39

Jammer was introduced because of complaints that artillery was overpowered, and there was no good counter. The radar detector is meant as a counter to the jammer. It does not of course block the jammer completely - that would make it useless - but should allow you to pinpoint it and more easily take it out. That's the theory. Whether it works in practice is another matter.

User avatar
andrvaut
Trained
Trained
Posts: 150
Joined: 02 Jan 2016, 12:44

Re: Jammer balance

Post by andrvaut » 07 Jan 2019, 22:53

The main problem of a jammer now is a change in the operation of direct attack weapons.
Its effect should not greatly enhance the usual army.
vaut ΣΑ [GN], ru streamer.
Tournaments channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzusNa-54ydodtSz2TdHFww

User avatar
Berserk Cyborg
Code contributor
Code contributor
Posts: 795
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 19:56

Re: Jammer balance

Post by Berserk Cyborg » 08 Jan 2019, 05:54

Per wrote: Jammer was introduced because of complaints that artillery was overpowered, and there was no good counter.
Emphasis mine.

Artillery has a perfect hard counter: VTOLs. IIRC, artillery is rather costly and takes longer to manufacture than most weapon systems*. Its not even a weapon you'd want to compose the majority of your group of, for you'd want some mix of machine-guns, flamers, rockets, or cannons instead. Just something to whittle down the enemy army and make yours more likely to survive during a battle.

Most artillery weapons can't take many hits. Once the VTOL is taken out of the equation then you would have to then rely on hover units to sneak around the enemy army and destroy the artillery groups as a counter. Or, make use of your own artillery group and have a CB turret around to focus on hitting the enemy artillery, which is more dangerous option, but more or less cancels out their artillery if sufficient in numbers.

If games disable VTOLs then it makes artillery look like a good choice. Compound that with an absurdly high oil map, and you'll have even more problems cause there is no incentive to NOT go for the weapon with the best range while its defended by a group of cannons or whatever.

*Been a while since I've played a skirmish, nor have I played true multiplayer. So my conjecture might be flawed.

---

The main issue with the jammer is that it limits the vision range of all enemy objects far too much. Perhaps the best fix is to only limit the vision of artillery-capable objects (thus protects stuff from artillery fire and counter-battery). Then people would have more of an incentive to use radar detectors to know if the enemy might have a jammer. As it is right now, radar detectors that detect a jammer only tell the player that unstoppable doom is coming their way. But if that main issue is addressed then I can see radar detector being a, maybe, must have system.

User avatar
Berg
Regular
Regular
Posts: 2186
Joined: 02 Sep 2007, 23:25
Location: Australia

Re: Jammer balance

Post by Berg » 08 Jan 2019, 10:38

Per wrote:
07 Jan 2019, 20:39
Jammer was introduced because of complaints that artillery was overpowered, and there was no good counter.
The Only reason artillery became popular is with the 40 oil per base maps.
On a low oil map like warzones default maps (do note I said default) it would take a good 1hour plus to get enough artillery to make a difference.
So the need for jammers was forced on us by having abnormal maps.
PS:you can fix the need for jammers by dropping the oil pumps limit to 16. :lecture:

User avatar
andrvaut
Trained
Trained
Posts: 150
Joined: 02 Jan 2016, 12:44

Re: Jammer balance

Post by andrvaut » 08 Jan 2019, 11:56

Berg, You have an idea about the perfect game in the warzone. But statistics show that your opinion does not coincide with the majority of players. People like massive dynamic battles.

Let us not spoil the game for most players.

PS There is no artillery on low, since the start decides everything. After receiving the energy advantage, everything is completed within a few minutes.

PSS Maps with a lot of energy are no easier than low oil. They are just different.
Last edited by andrvaut on 08 Jan 2019, 23:03, edited 1 time in total.
vaut ΣΑ [GN], ru streamer.
Tournaments channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzusNa-54ydodtSz2TdHFww

Per
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Posts: 3768
Joined: 03 Aug 2006, 19:39

Re: Jammer balance

Post by Per » 08 Jan 2019, 23:01

Yes, VTOL is a counter to artillery, but I'm not sure it is a sufficient one, because it takes a long time to get to VTOLs if you notice that the enemy is going artillery and you were not planning to go that route already.

Ideally direct fire weapons would not be affected by the jammer. And if you get close enough (within 'vision range') they won't be. However, the vision system in Warzone does not support this distinction very well. It would probably be best if artillery was entirely dependent on dedicated spotter units to target enemies outside of their own vision. So what is actually overpowering artillery may not be artillery itself, but rather the sensor turrets. I wonder if we could somehow make jammers only target those... but visualizing this in a nice way so players can see what is going on... I don't know how we would do that.

Per
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Posts: 3768
Joined: 03 Aug 2006, 19:39

Re: Jammer balance

Post by Per » 08 Jan 2019, 23:04

Just throwing this idea out there: Radar detector detect sensor turrets in a very long range already. What if we changed the jammer into a very long range direct fire "weapon" that simply disables a single sensor turret? Or all sensor turrets within the target area.

User avatar
Berserk Cyborg
Code contributor
Code contributor
Posts: 795
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 19:56

Re: Jammer balance

Post by Berserk Cyborg » 09 Jan 2019, 00:26

Maybe have those targeted sensors glow a certain color? Or have a little icon drawn near them (think experience image) like a "x" or have the jammer cursor image drawn over the entire object...

To me it would make more sense for a jammer to affect all sensors. Otherwise there would be constant manufacturing of jammers to combat more sensors and vice versa, which seems kind of silly.

User avatar
Guardsman Brendo
Trained
Trained
Posts: 72
Joined: 01 Mar 2016, 00:12
Location: Pre-collapse United States

Re: Jammer balance

Post by Guardsman Brendo » 22 May 2019, 01:04

Berserk Cyborg wrote:
09 Jan 2019, 00:26
Maybe have those targeted sensors glow a certain color? Or have a little icon drawn near them (think experience image) like a "x" or have the jammer cursor image drawn over the entire object...

To me it would make more sense for a jammer to affect all sensors. Otherwise there would be constant manufacturing of jammers to combat more sensors and vice versa, which seems kind of silly.
I very much like this idea. The jammers are meant to counter sensors and don't interfere with eyeballs unless they put out so much radiation tank drivers get eye cancer and die. A modified version of the red "target with sensor" icon would be a great indicator, perhaps placed below the affected sensor tanks.
--As of the above time, this was the last transmission received.

Post Reply