Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Ideas and suggestions for how to improve the Warzone 2100 base game only. Ideas for mods go in Mapping/Modding instead. Read sticky posts first!
alto1234
Trained
Trained
Posts: 57
Joined: 01 Oct 2010, 17:12

Re: Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Post by alto1234 » 19 Oct 2010, 05:10

Verin wrote:Mg's are also VERY effective Vs bunkers. (compared to other weapons) The flamer will melt a bunker, the bunker buster will kill it too, but no one uses it.

Main point:
Mgs have TOO MUCH HP
TOO MUCH DPS (fire rate)
TOO CHEAP - fast production
Research is TOO EASY!!!
it is better now, check out the second one of these build orders for a viable counter to mgs. of course you have to have your wits about you in micromanagement. deterministic netcode will make micromanagement all the more viable.

User avatar
Axel
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 27
Joined: 19 May 2008, 15:18
Location: Russia
Contact:

Re: Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Post by Axel » 19 Oct 2010, 10:06

yes i think Ap balance is trouble!!!
1) who want win build mgs and ass guns (twin ass guns)
2) every want to win!!!
3) now many people Isn't able play after twin ass gun.
4) many peoples Isn't able play not for mgs.
5) i know that i talking about! Are you?
6) many mgs tanks not problem, problem is many mgs tanks with a lot of borgs (rockets has become useless).
7) i see how some people try some of youre ideas and they loose!! by many mgs tanks with a lot of borgs!!!
8) if some one doubt in my skills or exp, ask about me for most exp and active players!!! like Wardog, housewitser,...

TVR
Trained
Trained
Posts: 216
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 22:59

Re: Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Post by TVR » 19 Oct 2010, 19:52

Do you guys, by any chance, play with VTOLs disabled?

User avatar
Black Project
Regular
Regular
Posts: 745
Joined: 04 Apr 2008, 20:53

Re: Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Post by Black Project » 19 Oct 2010, 20:28

TVR wrote:Do you guys, by any chance, play with VTOLs disabled?
You forgot to say something like that: Do you guys, by any chance, play only NTW with VTOLs disabled?

Correct me if i'm wrong, but i couldn't resist to make this intriguing question.

BP :ninja:

User avatar
Alpha93
Trained
Trained
Posts: 261
Joined: 02 Aug 2008, 20:23
Location: Italy,in YOUR computer
Contact:

Re: Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Post by Alpha93 » 22 Oct 2010, 20:48

Verin wrote:Mg's are also VERY effective Vs bunkers. (compared to other weapons) The flamer will melt a bunker, the bunker buster will kill it too, but no one uses it.
Tbh this isn't true, I make use of BBs in MP if the enemy has a well fortified base or a wall of bunkers (aka NTW), alongside with arty for clearing out enemy arty or helping in destroying the enemy defenses. You can ask some of the peeps who were teamed up with me, I always used BBs as a support weapon rather than a main one. As for flamers, I won't use them until I get Inferno or Plasmite or otherwise I use light flamers only VERY early, against borg/bunker spam.
Xfire-->chris37killer

User avatar
Project
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 30
Joined: 21 Oct 2010, 19:32

Re: Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Post by Project » 23 Oct 2010, 01:47

MGs should be good against cyborgs and buildings like in the campaign and no so good vs armoured units. Isn't that the case with this build?

User avatar
Black Project
Regular
Regular
Posts: 745
Joined: 04 Apr 2008, 20:53

Re: Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Post by Black Project » 27 Oct 2010, 19:01

Some radical suggestions to make MG less desirable against tanks in later games, but it doesn't mean that you'll not have to use MGs, since you'll need them to back up All-Rounder/Anti-Tank units against enemy Cyborgs.

- Reduce damage multiplier for Anti-Personnel type against Half-tracked units from 0.80 to 0.75
- Reduce damage multiplier for Anti-Personnel type against Tracked units from 0.60 to 0.50
- Reduce damage multiplier for Anti-Personnel type against VTOL-type units from 0.60 to 0.50

Those may solve the MG madness on even low/moderate oil maps where most players tend to spam them, due to being cheaper/faster to produce, forcing the players to use a better anti-vehicle weapon.

They may choose between Cannons or Rockets for this purpose to help MG units to stand against heavy tanks in later game.

BP

R Hannay
Trained
Trained
Posts: 40
Joined: 26 Oct 2010, 19:21

Re: Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Post by R Hannay » 27 Oct 2010, 20:01

Black Project wrote:Some radical suggestions to make MG less desirable against tanks in later games, but it doesn't mean that you'll not have to use MGs, since you'll need them to back up All-Rounder/Anti-Tank units against enemy Cyborgs.

- Reduce damage multiplier for Anti-Personnel type against Half-tracked units from 0.80 to 0.75
- Reduce damage multiplier for Anti-Personnel type against Tracked units from 0.60 to 0.50
- Reduce damage multiplier for Anti-Personnel type against VTOL-type units from 0.60 to 0.50

Those may solve the MG madness on even low/moderate oil maps where most players tend to spam them, due to being cheaper/faster to produce, forcing the players to use a better anti-vehicle weapon.

They may choose between Cannons or Rockets for this purpose to help MG units to stand against heavy tanks in later game.

BP
This might just be what we need!

User avatar
macuser
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1052
Joined: 19 Mar 2010, 23:35
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Post by macuser » 27 Oct 2010, 20:48

IMHO what should be done is to make it more realistic.

1. MG's do little to no good against walls
2. mgs do fair damage to buildings
3. mgs do fair damage to light tanks
4. mgs do little to no damage to med/heavy tanks
5. mgs slaughter borgs
6. mgs do normal damage to vtols
7.mgs do fair damage to bunkers

-regards macuser
ArtRev Website

ImageImage

System: AMD Phenom II x4, 4GB RAM, 640GB HD, Nvidia GeForce GT 240 1GB, Mac OS X 10.6

User avatar
Black Project
Regular
Regular
Posts: 745
Joined: 04 Apr 2008, 20:53

Re: Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Post by Black Project » 27 Oct 2010, 21:46

macuser wrote:IMHO what should be done is to make it more realistic.

1. MG's do little to no good against walls
2. mgs do fair damage to buildings
3. mgs do fair damage to light tanks
4. mgs do little to no damage to med/heavy tanks
5. mgs slaughter borgs
6. mgs do normal damage to vtols
7.mgs do fair damage to bunkers

-regards macuser
I think your proposal is too much radical for my taste, IMO. I don't know what the people will say about that, but let's wait what they will say about your proposals :D

Reality sucks, IMHO, and Warzone 2100 don't fit well for realistic purposes, i think we discussed about that in some topic else.

More MG balance proposals by me:

- Reduce Assault Gun/Twin Assault Gun range from 1152 to 1024.
- Twin Assault Gun + it's defensive variant no more replaces the Assault Gun + defensive variants.
- Increase Twin Assault Gun price from 100 to 175 & build time from 500 to 700.
- Increase Twin Assault Gun weight from 600 to 1800 & Hitpoints from 300 to 375.

Regard BP

User avatar
effigy
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1217
Joined: 22 Jan 2010, 03:21
Contact:

Re: Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Post by effigy » 28 Oct 2010, 03:52

Black Project wrote: - Reduce damage multiplier for Anti-Personnel type against Half-tracked units from 0.80 to 0.75
- Reduce damage multiplier for Anti-Personnel type against Tracked units from 0.60 to 0.50
- Reduce damage multiplier for Anti-Personnel type against VTOL-type units from 0.60 to 0.50
Sounds good for Half-tracked and Tracked, and maybe Hover should get a small reduction too, but I think VTOL is fine where it is now.
Black Project wrote:
...

- Reduce Assault Gun/Twin Assault Gun range from 1152 to 1024.
- Twin Assault Gun + it's defensive variant no more replaces the Assault Gun + defensive variants.
- Increase Twin Assault Gun price from 100 to 175 & build time from 500 to 700.
- Increase Twin Assault Gun weight from 600 to 1800 & Hitpoints from 300 to 375.

Regard BP
I don't think weight should go up 3x what it is now. 1.5x to 900 sounds better to me.
This is why some features aren't implemented: http://forums.wz2100.net/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=7490&view=unread#p87241

User avatar
Black Project
Regular
Regular
Posts: 745
Joined: 04 Apr 2008, 20:53

Re: Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Post by Black Project » 28 Oct 2010, 13:47

effigy wrote:
Black Project wrote: - Reduce damage multiplier for Anti-Personnel type against Half-tracked units from 0.80 to 0.75
- Reduce damage multiplier for Anti-Personnel type against Tracked units from 0.60 to 0.50
- Reduce damage multiplier for Anti-Personnel type against VTOL-type units from 0.60 to 0.50
Sounds good for Half-tracked and Tracked, and maybe Hover should get a small reduction too, but I think VTOL is fine where it is now.
Think about the Assault Gun, it's about almost 2.5x more powerful than a Heavy MG, 0.50 multiplier fits well for me. :D

Another proposal...

- Reduce damage multiplier for Anti-Personnel type against Hovered units from 1.10 to 1.00 (same as Wheeled units)

They have little more HP than Wheeled tanks, however. i think giving the same multiplier damage as Wheeled tanks would make the Wheels really disappear from the battlefields.

To be honest, they already disappear ingame when the faster Hover propulsion arrives to the player, so why bothering with Wheeled propulsion when you have a faster propulsion which can travel in water at the same time.
effigy wrote:I don't think weight should go up 3x what it is now. 1.5x to 900 sounds better to me.
1200 could be fine, it's 200 more heavy than a Light Cannon, not a significant buff up on weight, but might be ok.

What about increasing the weight of the Assault Gun to 1000, then, for the Twin AG to 2000?

HMG is more powerful & 400/200kg heavier than MG/TMG, why not make the AG heavier than the HMG?

I think that will fit better for me, AFAIK.

Correction: HMG is 200kg heavier than TMG & 400kg heavier than MG.

BP
Last edited by Black Project on 28 Oct 2010, 17:15, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
effigy
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1217
Joined: 22 Jan 2010, 03:21
Contact:

Re: Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Post by effigy » 28 Oct 2010, 16:06

Oh, I agree, I didn't realize AG was not heavier than HMG.
This is why some features aren't implemented: http://forums.wz2100.net/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=7490&view=unread#p87241

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

Re: Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Post by NoQ » 28 Oct 2010, 23:01

I also want a two-tonn machine gun!!! o.O :D

3drts
Trained
Trained
Posts: 379
Joined: 01 Aug 2007, 03:50

Re: Weapon balance favors machineguns (AP type)

Post by 3drts » 29 Oct 2010, 17:49

So you want something like two of these?
Image


* yes is is generally considered a cannon, but generally speaking, anything much over 50 cal is considered a cannon, regardless of if it fires slug, sabot, or shell, and if the damage values are any indicator, the assault gun fires a larger round than the HMG
The assault cannon clearly is not a gatling gun type cannon.

Post Reply