Yet another balance proposal.

The place to discuss balance changes for future versions of the game.
(Master releases & 3.X)
User avatar
Iluvalar
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1803
Joined: 02 Oct 2010, 18:44

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Iluvalar » 11 May 2012, 13:12

Dororo :
Do you think you could do the vtol bombing that easily if the inferno weapon (that you probably rely on ground) is nerfed ?

Also, take note that vtols are the natural enemies of arty. If your friend "blindly" research artillery and you come up with vtols, it will always be a lose for him.
Heretic 2.3 improver and proud of it.

Dororo
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 16
Joined: 25 Apr 2012, 06:28
Location: Australia AND Austria
Contact:

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Dororo » 11 May 2012, 13:19

Thank you :) I was absolutely not sure how much impact the "inferno base stats" have on "VTOL bombers stats".
So it should be alright then ^^

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

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Reg312 » 11 May 2012, 13:31

vtols nerfed in 3.1 already because AA became stronger due to high Rate of Fire
i think all weapon with high ROF stronger in 3.1
thermite bombs are balanced only in low oil games

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

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by NoQ » 11 May 2012, 13:43

Dororo wrote:Thank you :) I was absolutely not sure how much impact the "inferno base stats" have on "VTOL bombers stats".
So it should be alright then ^^
The stats don't affect each other, it just becomes harder for you to invent thermite bombs without being destroyed in the process (because the enemy has invested into the ground force instead, which is available more quickly). Earlier you could hold with inferno hovers and borgs, but now you start to really fail the ground war when you try to pull out thermites.

Anyway, there seems to be a certain agreement in this thread that thermite/plasmite bombs shouldn't be nerfed :hmm: in fact i wouldn't mind having their burn damage nerfed a bit, especially due to Iluvalar's argument concerning lack of unit preview (in a long game it becomes pretty hard to feel wether the opponent is teching to thermite bombs or not, especially in FFA games). One last time to decide (:

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

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Reg312 » 11 May 2012, 14:13

350 damage per second on large area is too much i think
thermal armor, hardcrete - all useless vs thermite bombs, i think is not good..
high price for such overpowered weapon is bad solution, because even in low oil game you can get 2-3 bases and use thermite bombs as in high-oil

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

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by NoQ » 14 May 2012, 05:55

Ok, since we missed beta10, here's an update with the only change compared to v0.5:
  • gates price 25->75
(enough to notice and think about and not always build gates instead of walls)
I also updated the stats that slightly changed in beta9 (the scavmra change).
I think we'll leave the incendiary bombs problem for some other time, ok?
The flamer branch is already nerfed considerably.

Now ... now what? Should i make a ticket out of this mod maybe? (:

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

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Reg312 » 14 May 2012, 13:19

i see lot of tracked units in current beta games and its funny :)

yes, make ticket

i'm still requesting more balance inlow high oil games:
...cannon fortress price -20%, range -40%

and you still not fixed AA weapons which have higher ROF than AG
(still need testing)


[update]: i'll post change log for your mod tonight and we can play a some test games (will be online 22-01 Msk)
Last edited by Reg312 on 14 May 2012, 14:04, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by NoQ » 14 May 2012, 13:44

I guess not fixing the AA is a good complementary for not fixing the incendiary bombs (:
Curious idea about fortress :hmm: what everybody thinks? Cause i didn't see many forts in low oil, but this might make them useful (?)

(won't be online today, maybe later this week)

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

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Reg312 » 14 May 2012, 14:03

NoQ wrote:I guess not fixing the AA is a good complementary for not fixing the incendiary bombs (:
Curious idea about fortress :hmm: what everybody thinks? Cause i didn't see many forts in low oil, but this might make them useful (?)

(won't be online today, maybe later this week)
incendiary bombs is only few weapons from list of vtols weapons
better if vtol cannons and other stuff become more competiteve
so you nerfing incerndiary bombs + all other weak vtols weapons by keeping strong AA = not so good :)

cannon fortress strong as 4 heavy canons and have range as super T3 weapon like heavy laser,
fortresses make All other defenses useless
(scorge hardpoint/laser tower/tank killer hardpoint/heavy cannon hardpoint.. all much weaken than fortresses)


[upd]: i meant more balance in high oil games in my previous message

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

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Giani » 14 May 2012, 23:52

Reg312 wrote: so you nerfing incendiary bombs + all other weak vtols weapons by keeping strong AA = not so good :)
+1
My maps: http://forums.wz2100.net/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=9501

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

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by NoQ » 15 May 2012, 04:59

Frozen:
Inferno price 80->110 incend.radius 64->48 incend.damage 40->32
Thermite Cyborg incend.damage 38->32
Plasmite price 80->130 incend.radius 96->60 incend.damage 63->50
Incendiary Mortar price 150->200 incend.damage 30->22
Incendiary Howitzer price 250->300 incend.damage 60->32
Minipod range 1152->1088
MRA damage 34->28 reload time 145->165
HMG damage 18->17
AG fire pause 3->4 damage 20->19
TAG price 100->120 fire pause 3->4 damage 30->28
AG Cyborg fire pause 4->5 damage 20->18
MG ROF upgrades 15%/30%/45% -> 17%/34%/50%.
MC research points 4800->3600
HPV research points 7200->4800
Gates price 25->75
New:
Whirlwind fire pause 3->4
Thermite Bombs incend.damage 200->150
Plasmite Bombs incend.damage 200->175
Cannon Fortress price 1000->800 range 1792->1280

I still need to find out if the cannon fort remix is ok with everybody else in our team.

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

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Iluvalar » 15 May 2012, 05:44

your pricing logic must be inverted !!

10 fortress instead of 8 will perform better than 5 fortress instead of 4. If you want to nerf them in high oil more than in low oil, increase their price.
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 » 15 May 2012, 07:13

Iluvalar wrote:your pricing logic must be inverted !!

10 fortress instead of 8 will perform better than 5 fortress instead of 4. If you want to nerf them in high oil more than in low oil, increase their price.
i disagree
- high oil games also happens with more than 40 oils per player
- players make the amount fortresses that they want, not 8, or 10, or 5.. logic with price/count does not work very well in high oil games, because units limit still resticted by 135, but energy and defenses - unlimited
- fortresses have 2x2 size and in many cases you cannot build many of them in 1 spot
(in 3.1 version i think they cannot shoot through themselves?)
- price should be increased 50% or more to make it sensitive in high oil games
......
ah and fortresses was nefed greatly by "range 1792->1280"
Iluvalar can you proof by formulas or by tests why 5 "new" fortresses better than 4 "old" fortresses?
old ones can shoot 2 times before enemy units can reach them....

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

Re: Yet another balance proposal.

Post by Giani » 15 May 2012, 13:43

Reg312 wrote: (in 3.1 version i think they cannot shoot through themselves?)
They can't.
NoQ wrote: New:
Thermite Bombs incend.damage 200->150
Plasmite Bombs incend.damage 200->175
And what about making them weak against AA on walls? :hmm:
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 » 15 May 2012, 16:04

Giani wrote: And what about making them weak against AA on walls? :hmm:
patch in warzone code required for this
i mean set % modifier for indendiary damage
i can make it, if people will be agreed it can be included

Post Reply