Yet another balance proposal.

The place to discuss balance changes for future versions of the game.
(Master releases & 3.X)
User avatar
Giani
Regular
Regular
Posts: 804
Joined: 23 Aug 2011, 22:42
Location: Argentina

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Giani » 20 Jun 2012, 16:39

Yesterday, I started a game whit advanced bases. At 6:00, 6 MG borgs came to my base and destroyed 3/4 of the base in 1 minute...
There wasn't any defence and the tanks were far away...
My maps: http://forums.wz2100.net/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=9501

Reg312
Regular
Regular
Posts: 681
Joined: 25 Mar 2011, 18:36

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Reg312 » 21 Jun 2012, 15:36

Giani wrote: advanced bases
6-00 is not too early
Last edited by Reg312 on 22 Jun 2012, 07:18, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Giani
Regular
Regular
Posts: 804
Joined: 23 Aug 2011, 22:42
Location: Argentina

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Giani » 22 Jun 2012, 01:00

Reg312 wrote: next time you have to upgrade base structure materials :)
Giani wrote:At 6:00
And I usually upgrade them.
My maps: http://forums.wz2100.net/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=9501

User avatar
Iluvalar
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1803
Joined: 02 Oct 2010, 18:44

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Iluvalar » 23 Jun 2012, 18:17

Giani wrote:Yesterday, I started a game whit advanced bases. At 6:00, 6 MG borgs came to my base and destroyed 3/4 of the base in 1 minute...
There wasn't any defence and the tanks were far away...
The enemy chose a mg rush, you chose an opening that doesn't counter that, you lost. Embrace the randomness of 3.1 .
Heretic 2.3 improver and proud of it.

User avatar
Giani
Regular
Regular
Posts: 804
Joined: 23 Aug 2011, 22:42
Location: Argentina

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Giani » 23 Jun 2012, 18:21

Iluvalar wrote: The enemy chose a mg rush, you chose an opening that doesn't counter that, you lost. Embrace the randomness of 3.1 .
The problems isn't the weapons line I choosed, because my tanks were far away. And 2.3.9 has more randomness. 3.1 has randomness if you don't get used to use sensors for scouting...
And 6 cyborgs destroying a base in 1 minute isn't "normal".
My maps: http://forums.wz2100.net/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=9501

Reg312
Regular
Regular
Posts: 681
Joined: 25 Mar 2011, 18:36

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Reg312 » 23 Jun 2012, 18:27

Giani wrote: And 6 cyborgs destroying a base in 1 minute isn't "normal".
cyborgs was not changed from 2.3. you choosed wrong thread
and its normal..you have to use hover tanks or use walls on your base

anti-cyborg weapons was nerfed but not so much

User avatar
Iluvalar
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1803
Joined: 02 Oct 2010, 18:44

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Iluvalar » 23 Jun 2012, 18:35

Actually... the accuracy bug is making the machine gun probably hit 100% instead of the 50% expected on big structures. As long as the structure is more than 1.52 tiles wide.
Heretic 2.3 improver and proud of it.

User avatar
NoQ
Special
Special
Posts: 6226
Joined: 24 Dec 2009, 11:35
Location: /var/zone

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by NoQ » 23 Jun 2012, 18:46

if you don't get used to use sensors for scouting...
You can't afford sensors on the 6th minute of the game either.

Reg312
Regular
Regular
Posts: 681
Joined: 25 Mar 2011, 18:36

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Reg312 » 23 Jun 2012, 18:52

Iluvalar wrote:Actually... the accuracy bug is making the machine gun probably hit 100% instead of the 50% expected on big structures. As long as the structure is more than 1.52 tiles wide.
50% is not expected and it is not bug

User avatar
Iluvalar
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1803
Joined: 02 Oct 2010, 18:44

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Iluvalar » 23 Jun 2012, 19:04

Reg312 wrote:
Iluvalar wrote:Actually... the accuracy bug is making the machine gun probably hit 100% instead of the 50% expected on big structures. As long as the structure is more than 1.52 tiles wide.
50% is not expected and it is not bug
Well you know, we have cartoonish scales... No sane warrior would wait to be 10 step away from the structure to start shooting in real life :lol2:

Anyway, the stats files say that the accuracy of those cyborgs at full range is 50% . The game was balanced for years on that information.
Heretic 2.3 improver and proud of it.

Reg312
Regular
Regular
Posts: 681
Joined: 25 Mar 2011, 18:36

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Reg312 » 23 Jun 2012, 19:11

Iluvalar wrote: Anyway, the stats files say that the accuracy of those cyborgs at full range is 50% . The game was balanced for years on that information.
i dont see people whose balanced game in years... we dont have person which can say what was expected with 50%

i believe in developers who said that balance was impossible in 2.3 due to different frameratec etc. :)

User avatar
Iluvalar
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1803
Joined: 02 Oct 2010, 18:44

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Iluvalar » 23 Jun 2012, 19:53

Is that a troll or something ?
Heretic 2.3 improver and proud of it.

Reg312
Regular
Regular
Posts: 681
Joined: 25 Mar 2011, 18:36

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Reg312 » 23 Jun 2012, 19:59

Iluvalar wrote:Is that a troll or something ?
what wrong in my sentence?
i just don't know who balanced game for years and how good they were

User avatar
NoQ
Special
Special
Posts: 6226
Joined: 24 Dec 2009, 11:35
Location: /var/zone

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by NoQ » 23 Jun 2012, 20:14

They were pretty good. Seriously good.

I think it was Zarel who made most of the balance recently, in the "previous generation" of this community; this included splitting cannons and rockets into different damage classes (AR and AT, cannons are AT in campaign and original balance) etc.

I'm sure i saw a complete changelog/history of wz balance somewhere there, but i can't find it now.

Reg312
Regular
Regular
Posts: 681
Joined: 25 Mar 2011, 18:36

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Reg312 » 23 Jun 2012, 20:37

NoQ wrote:They were pretty good. Seriously good.
i disagreed.
ok they was good, but..

1) i dont like certain things in "classic" MP balance
some of them:
- weak wheeled propulsion (whyyy??)
- weak tracked propulsion (due to slowness, but yes depend on map and teams)
- heavy MG tower aviable from start (i guess old balancers just adoived balance with defensive structures, but yes depend on map)
- weak/less usable cannon hardpoints
- op inferno and op thermite bombs and other incendiary weapons
- weak defensive/turtle tactics in low oil games (except first 10 minutes, when you can turtle with mg tower)
after strong mg tower in begin of game player cannot use defenses, because he need fight enemy in 2 or more directions and manage oil derricks
- bad speed\weigth system viewtopic.php?f=42&t=9314
speed,terrain modifiers,speed upgrades - completely broken and works weird

2) old balancers never ever cared about high oil games or games on another maps than they play
**may be i'm wrong.. not sure 100%

3) old balancers never cared about T3 games
if we check T2/T3 stage we will see many weird things in stats

4) start with medium bases also was not balanced

5) i guess old balancers more worked with 1v1 games or 2v2
3v3 and 4v4 games was not balanced.. i just feel that :)

i know you Noqvalar guys like games as "Scissors Paper Stone"
this goal was reached by old balancers, but with what price?... :ninja:

Post Reply