Campaign rebalancing

The place to discuss balance changes for future versions of the game.
(Master releases & 3.X)
Post Reply
User avatar
alfred007
Regular
Regular
Posts: 575
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Campaign rebalancing

Post by alfred007 » 25 Jul 2020, 13:54

Last year Bethrezen, Berserk Cyborg, and I started a project rebalancing the campaign. Reasons where under- and overpowered weapons. Lancer is overpowered, Cannons nearly useless and so on. With a lot of new people on the official Discord Server I want to reactivate this project.

You can download the current version of the mod we made here. The discussion about the changes you can read here and here. It's a lot to read and usually too much. I will post an overview of the changes we made soon (I can't remember everything at the moment but will check the next days) but everybody is invited to get surprised. :wink:

Comments are welcome and can be posted here or at the official Discord Server in the #campaign section.

Have fun!

User avatar
alfred007
Regular
Regular
Posts: 575
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Re: Campaign rebalancing

Post by alfred007 » 27 Jul 2020, 20:56

Here is the first part of the overview of the changes we made. Information for the levels will follow later.

Stats

Trucks: HP increased to 80 from 50

Structure:

Made the Scavenger structures stronger

MG Bunker: LongRange increased to 830 from 768
Twin MG Bunker: LongRange increased to 830 from 768
Heavy MG Bunker: LongRange reduced to 860 from 960
New: Flame Tower; MG Tower (in addition to the Heavy MG Tower)

A few minor changes in structures I don‘t list in detail. Mainly because I can‘t remember everything.


Structuremodifier
Implementing the new weaponEffect ALL ROUNDER with the following values:
BUNKER: 75
HARD: 85
MEDIUM: 100
SOFT: 115

ANTI PERSONNEL:
BUNKER: Reduced to 20 from 100
HARD: Reduced to 40 from 75
MEDIUM: Reduced to 70 from 100
SOFT: Reduced to 125 from 200

ANTI TANK:
BUNKER: Reduced to 25 from 40
HARD: Reduced to 50 from 55
MEDIUM: Increased to 75 from 50

BUNKER BUSTER:
MEDIUM: Increased to 200 from 100

FLAMER:
HARD: Increased to 40 from 5
MEDIUM: Increased to 140 from 100
SOFT: Increased to 160 from 150


Weaponmodifier:
Implementing the new weaponEffect ALL ROUNDER with the following values:
Half-Tracked: 105
Hover: 115
Legged: 60
Lift: 100
Tracked: 100
Wheeled: 110

ANTI PERSONNEL:
Legged: Reduced to 120 from 125
Tracked: Reduced to 60 from 75

ANTI TANK:
Half-Tracked: Reduced to 120 from 125
Hover: Reduced to 80 from 125
Legged: Reduced to 35 from 75
Tracked: Reduced to 115 from 125

ARTILLERY ROUND:
Hover: Reduced to 120 from 150
Legged: Reduced to 150 from 200
Tracked: Reduced to 80 from 100
Wheeled: Increased to 130 from 100

FLAMER:
Half-Tracked: Reduced to 75 from 80
Hover: Reduced to 110 from 150
Legged: Reduced to 130 from 150
Tracked: Reduced to 60 from 80
Wheeled: Reduced to 85 from 100

Weapons:

All cannons got the weaponEffect ALL ROUNDER

Scavengers:
We gave the Scavengers the same MG's as the player have. MG, TwinMG, and Heavy MG with the same stats. The special Scavenger MG got removed.

Flamer: Damage reduced to 8 from 25, ROF increased to 33 from 5, longHit reduced to 60 from 65, longRange increased to 800 from 384, periodicalDamage reduced to 8 from 10, periodicalDamageRadius increased to 80 from 32, periodicalDamageTime reduced to 40 from 90

Tower MG: Damage reduced to 14 from 16, longRange reduced to 900 from 960

Player:
Light Cannon: Damage reduced to 20 from 30, ROF increased to 60 from 15
Medium Cannon: Damage reduced to 40 from 45, ROF increased to 30 from 13
Heavy Cannon: Damage increased to 80 from 70, ROF increased to 15 from 12

Commander Turret: Damage reduced to 1 from 4

Flamer: Damage reduced to 12 from 30, ROF increased to 27 from 5, periodicalDamage reduced to 14 from 15, periodicalDamageRadius increased to 100 from 32, periodicalDamageTime reduced to 50 from 60

Machinegun: longHit increased to 60 from 50
Twin Machinegun: longHit increased to 60 from 50
Heavy Machinegun: longHit increased to 60 from 50

Bombard: Damage increased to 90 from 80

Lancer: Damage reduced to 120 from 160

Mini-Rocket Pod: ROF reduced to 50 from 60, longHit increased to 41 from 30, longRange increased to 1088 from 960

Cyborgs
Heavy Gunner: Damage reduced to 20 from 30, ROF increased to 60 from 15, longRange increased to 832 from 758
Machinegunner: Damage increased to 18 from 15, ROF reduced to 86 from 100, longHit increased to 60 from 50, longRange increased to 832 from 768
Flamer: Damage reduced to 12 from 25, ROF increased to 27 from 5
Lancer: Damage increased to 120 from 100, ROF increased to 10 from 3, longRange increase to 1024 from 896

User avatar
Hironaru
Trained
Trained
Posts: 38
Joined: 11 Jun 2017, 10:10

Re: Campaign rebalancing

Post by Hironaru » 11 Jan 2021, 11:55

After A long long time, I am back and now enrolled in Computer Engineering at MSU. YAY!

My original self-imposed project was re-balancing before I went homeless and I would like to come back into the fold and join you in your quest to make this happen. I am more experienced now, with tools and analysis methods that I think could help provide structure and progression balance between having and not having certain upgrades at every stage of the game? And I would like to take what you have so far and do a full analysis.

I'm Steve, most people call me Op or Hiro, the very first thing I want to do is see what you've got so far and a complete play through? But before I undertake that, I need to ask if the bug with save states and upgrades not registering (or no longer being researched after quitting and reloading the game) between acts is still a thing, or if that has been rectified by the core team? I can do a full playthrough that way, but I would have to create a VM and use save states for that.

I am still attending classes this semester and I will be helping teach circuitry fundamentals at my University. So, I may not be available in discord all the time, but I read all messages eventually and definitely would prefer to use this forum post and discord for all of our communications between ourselves and other teams.

I am really excited this is being addressed finally, so I am behind you all the way! I will try to get discord set up for this tomorrow.

Hiro
Last edited by Hironaru on 11 Jan 2021, 12:05, edited 1 time in total.
Do, or do not. There is no try.
-yoda

User avatar
Hironaru
Trained
Trained
Posts: 38
Joined: 11 Jun 2017, 10:10

Re: Campaign rebalancing

Post by Hironaru » 11 Jan 2021, 12:03

@Bethrezen, @Berserk Cyborg, good to see you are still active. My life is more stable now, sorry for being a broke mf.

You might recall my BOMB (Balancing Overhaul) initiative, your contributions to it; I want to continue my work and show you and the more experienced developers that I'm in this for the long haul and am not going to flake, please forgive my absence and let me put work where my words are.
Do, or do not. There is no try.
-yoda

User avatar
Hironaru
Trained
Trained
Posts: 38
Joined: 11 Jun 2017, 10:10

Re: Campaign rebalancing

Post by Hironaru » 11 Jan 2021, 12:30

For those of you who have no idea what I am referring to, my original post was here viewtopic.php?t=13813

Alfred, I am really excited just seeing some of the changes you have made; I really look forward to your modifications! I will use the same testing gamut I intended to use for the development of my balancing, playing each level and doing a detailed analysis sequentially for the three playstyles I described in my previous initiative, then talk to you about it here before continuing on with the next mission.

Where my heads at is I want to be approaching this from three vantage points on top of the 3 playstyles I mentioned, with the addition of a fourth listed below. I know you guys have already dug into difficulties, so I think what I should do to catch up with everyone is just play it through completely on normal, then step it up and repeat the process. If you have any other approach you would like me to take specific to your process of analysis, let me know and I will do your version first. My runs will not feature macros, hotkeys, or rapid gameplay to simulate a new, average player. I will still be using unit grouping. I will be actively trying to emulate how a new player with some rts experience (but not alot) would behave, in everything from scouting to collecting resources.

Each stage analysis will require 4 runs per difficulty for me to perform. I will stream each play as a twitch stream video for individual analysis once I believe I have captured what a player of that archetype would do accurately. What I would like to do first is do a run through completely for each style, then go back and work each individual level with my own variation (if necessary), trying to balance the difficulty perfectly between all styles, before proposing it here.

What my method will look like to you is this:

-----

Style z
Zerg: Offensive proactive; I will attempt to rapidly build economy and overwhelm bases before they can attack me. This style of gameplay involves keeping a huge production line churning. Rapid base expansion and economy outweigh defense, with walls and borders being considered a waste of money. A steadily increasing stream of units will wear down the base until it has been overwhelmed. Often features a fast initial attack and rally points in the enemy base.

level a.b.c (where a is the level, b is a sublevel (loading screen), and c is an event; such as a message, video, or trigger.)
Video link to level a.b.c playstyle z
Z specific playstyle benefits
Z specific playstyle obstacles
Z specific gameplay event time analysis
Z synopsis and reflection

Style o:
Offensive reactive; I will pool units until I come under attack, then counterattack while their forces are depleted. This playstyle does not build base defenses, because it pools units to respond to threats in its own base. This playstyle is about taking advantage of time and distance; if both players build at the same rate, by the time an offense arrives, it is smaller in force. Once an enemy has depleted its units, a counterattack ensues. Usually rallies at base, or resources.

level a.b.c
Video link to level a.b.c playstyle o
o specific playstyle benefits
o specific playstyle obstacles
o specific gameplay event time analysis
o synopsis and reflection

Style r
Raid: Defensive reactive; I will build defenses while sending cheap units to harass enemy economy and scout attacks. This playstyle focuses on fast units, meant to kite and harass the enemy and poke bases for weaknesses. Defenses are built first with a mix of units for response, which are then used to secure resources and defend the construction of forward bases, making it difficult to recapture before response. Usually uses rally points at forward bases.

level a.b.c
Video link to level a.b.c playstyle r
r specific playstyle benefits
r specific playstyle obstacles
r specific gameplay event time analysis
r synopsis and reflection

Style d
Defensive proactive; I will create a single, massive base capable of withstanding any external attack, while building an army that can wipe the map. You know it, love it or hate it. This playstyle is slow, focusing on defensive structures and research. All available technology and upgrades will be researched before any attack, with the final units being fully upgraded and amassed to cap limit in a giant blob of doom. Rally points? Basically the largest open part of the base.


level a.b.c
Video link to level a.b.c playstyle d
d specific playstyle benefits
d specific playstyle obstacles
d specific gameplay event time analysis
d synopsis and reflection

-----

If you have any ideas, or want me to go in a specific direction, let me know. For now, I will play through the campaign the way I normally would as soon as I find out about the reload bug with upgrades from previous acts. Happy new year!
Do, or do not. There is no try.
-yoda

Post Reply