The 2.2 -> 2.3 Rebalance Thread

[devastator]

This becomes unstopable giving random ideas . . . I'm leaving this place

[Zarel]

So bombs aren't useless enough already?!

Have you played bombs? Bombs were useless in 1.10/2.1, but I made them really powerful in 2.2: They got 3 researchable damage upgrades, they were lightened significantly, they had their base damage increased, and they got really powerful splash attacks. Plasmite in particular pretty much destroys everything in a pretty big radius when fully upgraded.

I still have that dual-mini-pod rocket turret model, btw. Might extend mini-pod's AA effect for longer into the tech tree.

There's only so far you can extend a T1 weapon line... :/ Upload it again, I'll see if it's worth adding in.

Meh, not sure about this, hover is already so weak.

Hover is already stronger than tracks against AT and artillery rounds, and it's now much better against artillery. Considering its speed is like 5x tracks, and speed is pretty important in Warzone, it's fair to increase its vulnerability to all-rounder to as much as wheels.

You should really increase the range on the MRA as well.

I might up it to 9, but it's really not intended to be long-range artillery.

Yuk. Structure-Research dependencies are never the answer.

Well, you know how you need a Command Center before you can make a new tank design to manufacture? This is kind of the same idea, only with structure designs for building.

Aren't trucks already about as easy as it get to kill though?

In the early game, when you have MG Viper Wheels, trucks feel pretty hard to kill.

2.2 is also pretty frustrating for lancer users, as they're completely useless against enemy cyborg engineers.

I didn't say machingun cyborhs useles(but it's also true).I said machingun units(since twin machingun) makes cyborgs useless.So cyborgs need faster armor getting to become dangerous.

Machinegun units aren't used as much in the late game, which is where cyborgs shine.

Hasn't the problem of truck rushing been dealt with? Trucks can in any case be upgraded (strengthened) as bodies are researched.

Simply don't play with anyone using truck rushes; they are not playing WarZone.

False. Anyone who's playing Warzone is playing Warzone. The problem of truck rushing has been dealt with, but only in the sense of the changes I made.

[Zarel]

I just added:
- Lancer Tower can hit air
- Scourge Tower can hit air

What are your thoughts on those? Keep in mind that now that lancers and scourges do pretty much nothing to structures and cyborgs, they're a lot weaker than they were in 1.10/2.1.

[Per]

...
VTOL balance:
- Hurricane damage increased 40 -> 50, splash increased 10 -> 30
- Cyclone damage increased 50 -> 70, splash increased 40 -> 60
- Whirlwind damage increased 50 -> 60, splash increased 20 -> 30
- Avenger damage increased 320 -> 360, accuracy increased 60-70 -> 70-80
- Vindicator damage increased 320 -> 360, accuracy increased 60-70 -> 70-80
- Plasmite Bomb weight increased 8000 -> 12000
- Mini-pod can hit air
- Lancer Tower can hit air
- Scourge Tower can hit air

I guess I missed the last three lines here. Given the above increases of AA power, I think making any missile tower able to take down VTOLs is way overkill. In fact, it will make the missile tech tree so good, it will be senseless to use anything else. And why research and build the SAM AA when you can just as well use Scourge Tower? It will also be a bit strange that hardpoints with lancer/scourge cannot hit air.

[Terminator]

seems like VTOL factory Doesn't need at all :-S I think its stupid, but if lancers,Scourgees,... will be low accuracy like 30% to hit air target - will be fine, but again, hard points still cant be controled, so vtol could become "useless" target and wasting ammunition. Its like send few vtols first than rush base by tank because all Rockets - reloading :\

thanks that Bunker Buster still ground units "eliminator" only =)

[winsrp]

well, all ideas sound really good actually.

I would also reduce the range of the howitzers and specially the archangel missile, thats just insane, you can win a map with a couple of these going around.

i would also allow the heat added related defenses like incendiary mortar, and all that stuff, available sooner in the game by just making them do lots fire damage an little physical damage to almost none. So they will add a new level of defense instead of having to replace you old ones with these new ones.

Also I don't think fire is well balanced in the game, fire resistances should be able to be improved earlier, and at the beginning fire should do more damage due to the, no one has fire resistances at beginning.

Maybe some other weapons too could have a little fire recoil and fire damage as the mini rockets, rocket battery, lancer, tank killer, and such since they are rockets after all, and a little fire damage could be expected.

[TVR]

Late-game stalemate-busting:
- Artillery to hover multiplier decreased from 110% to 25%

Avoid arbitrary balancing, artillery is already unable to hit 200 MPH hover tanks.

- Bunker-buster to hover multiplier increased from 20% to 60%

Why, why would an offencive HESH weapon do considerable damage to a offencive tank?

Bunker-buster should never, ever meet hover tanks in battle, because using bunker-buster for defencive purposes is foolish, using hover propulsion for defencive purposes, where an attacking force would bring BB, is also foolish.

- SRMA (see "Renames") range increased from 5-11 to 5-14

The Angel missile is the equivalent of the railgun in the rocket artillery line, it's wedged between the entry-level Ripple rockets, and the end-game Archangel missile.

But then again, all the other artillery niches have been filled, Pepperpot for short-range continuous bombardment, Hellstorm for general support, Ground-shaker for defence, and Archangel for CB.

Truck rush prevention:
- Command Center must be built before any defensive structure (such as MG tower) can be researched

Excellent as a segue into defencive structure design.

Perhaps the Command Centre could additionally serve to control all sentry defences, and thus function as an actual command centre.

- New "Improved Truck" (better name welcome) with 12 build points, 100 HP, and 500 weight. Prereq: Improved Engineering

Upgraded truck turret was never implement in the game design because it suffers from redundancy and balancing issues, first is construction upgrades already exist, and fulfill the necessity of increasing construction rate.

Secondly, the upgrade process itself is filled with potential blunders, what would happen to regular trucks after the upgraded turret is researched? Would the 15 truck limit apply to both this upgraded and regular, or would there be separate limits for both? Does this upgraded turret obsolete the regular turret in either case?

In most of these potential cases, upgraded truck turret is a minor nuisance to players, a single point in time for which they need to recycle all their trucks and replace them with upgraded trucks; in the other case, players would produce each truck to the limit, effectively increasing their total construction rate.

Perhaps trucks should actually function as trucks, simply transporting noticeably weighty prefab building sections manufactured in existing factories, and then arc-welding them together at the designated construction site; the load and velocity of each truck would depend only on its weight and engine power.

[tehloserer]

- New "Improved Truck" (better name welcome) with 12 build points, 100 HP, and 500 weight. Prereq: Improved Engineering

Are build points a measure of the supplies it's carrying or a measure of how fast it can construct? One fix at a time though. See what having the Command Center required for MG Tower does to truck rushing first. If that's not enough, then bring in the Ultruck and weaken the Construck. I'm TVR on the annoyance it would introduce to the game, unless it was only a passive upgrade, like Adv. Eng, Armor, and Engine upgrades are.

You know, where they effect all existing and future units. Have the Ultruck upgrade be a passive upgrade that drastically improves it's HP, Armor, and building speed. Don't do anything with the weight, that get's around having to recycle the trucks. Make it enough that you would want to take it, but don't weaken the original so much that you need it.

Perhaps trucks should actually function as trucks, simply transporting noticeably weighty prefab building sections manufactured in existing factories, and then arc-welding them together at the designated construction site; the load and velocity of each truck would depend only on its weight and engine power.

Realism? Ok, here goes. Trucks carry with them a cache of balloons, which they inflate when you tell them to build something. The resource consumed for "Construction" is only to power the air compressor. Couldn't resist.

This just seems like too drastic a change. Both to gameplay and to coding. On the coding end, it would take an (playercount)*15 array to keep track of how much each truck has "stored" in it, and adjust it's weight accordingly. In gameplay , now I have to hope that my trucks have enough "material" to make the building. They would have to make trips back to the Command Center to restock. And what if your command Center gets taken out and you have trucks with no supply but you have the power to make a new command center? Will there be a need for new "restock" centers?

I say we leave the trucks as is. Maybe get them an uber upgrade.

[Zarel]

seems like VTOL factory Doesn't need at all :-S I think its stupid, but if lancers,Scourgees,... will be low accuracy like 30% to hit air target - will be fine, but again, hard points still cant be controled, so vtol could become "useless" target and wasting ammunition. Its like send few vtols first than rush base by tank because all Rockets - reloading :\

Okay, so that's two votes against the towers hitting VTOLs idea. Idea removed.

That's strange, everyone liked the idea when I posted it in my mini-pod thread...

I would also reduce the range of the howitzers and specially the archangel missile, thats just insane, you can win a map with a couple of these going around.

The Archie currently has much lower range than it used to have - it's currently only a bit higher than the Ripple Rockets (i.e. about half what it used to be). This puts the ratios roughly equivalent. Long range artillery is supposed to be extremely long-range; so I wouldn't really mind leaving it at this.

If you have any reasoning for why they should be changed further, please specify.

Avoid arbitrary balancing, artillery is already unable to hit 200 MPH hover tanks.

I dislike relying on luck or microing to evade artillery. Plus, once homing artillery is implemented, Archies will be homing.

Remember, this is a change to bust late-game stalemates - situations where the enemy usually has fields of 800 artillery emplacements. If you get unlucky a few times, your hover tanks are gone completely. I've discussed this with Per at length - the best way to fix it is to have a very artillery-resistant unit type, and hover fits the bill perfectly.

Why, why would an offencive HESH weapon do considerable damage to a offencive tank?

Bunker-buster should never, ever meet hover tanks in battle, because using bunker-buster for defencive purposes is foolish, using hover propulsion for defencive purposes, where an attacking force would bring BB, is also foolish.

It was mostly a balancing move, since it didn't seem right that hover would be better against half the weapon types than tracks, especially considering how much faster hover is. Remember, 60% is not considerable damage; in fact, it's extremely low damage, considering BB has pretty low DPS (why we don't just up the damage and decrease the modifiers, I have no idea - maybe I'll do that sometime).

The Angel missile is the equivalent of the railgun in the rocket artillery line, it's wedged between the entry-level Ripple rockets, and the end-game Archangel missile.

It's more like the Needle gun, wedged between the lower-TL Hyper Velocity Cannon and the end-game Rail/Gauss. By the time it has enough upgrades to surpass the lower TL weapon, it's probably been superseded by a later weapon, anyway.

Plus, I've always wanted a T3 MRA.

Excellent as a segue into defencive structure design.

Someone finally understands my complex decision-making process that leads to these changes. I'm so happy.

Perhaps the Command Centre could additionally serve to control all sentry defences, and thus function as an actual command centre.

Unfortunately, this would make it a bit too much of a target. The way it currently is, it's both one of the first things you build, and one of the last things you destroy, and I really like it like that.

Upgraded truck turret was never implement in the game design because it suffers from redundancy and balancing issues, first is construction upgrades already exist, and fulfill the necessity of increasing construction rate.

Three different weapon upgrades exist, and upgraded weapon turrets still exist as well.

Secondly, the upgrade process itself is filled with potential blunders, what would happen to regular trucks after the upgraded turret is researched? Would the 15 truck limit apply to both this upgraded and regular, or would there be separate limits for both? Does this upgraded turret obsolete the regular turret in either case?

We already have a cyborg engineer; this would be the same thing. 15 truck limit applies to all constructors. The upgraded turret obsoletes the regular turret, but regular trucks would stay regular when the upgraded one is researched.

In most of these potential cases, upgraded truck turret is a minor nuisance to players, a single point in time for which they need to recycle all their trucks and replace them with upgraded trucks; in the other case, players would produce each truck to the limit, effectively increasing their total construction rate.

Minor nuisance it is - you have to recycle your repair turrets and sensors when the new version comes out, too. And not to mention your tanks, which you have to recycle all the time...

Perhaps trucks should actually function as trucks, simply transporting noticeably weighty prefab building sections manufactured in existing factories, and then arc-welding them together at the designated construction site; the load and velocity of each truck would depend only on its weight and engine power.

It's a good idea, and would completely fix the problem of truck rushes, but unfortunately it would change the game of Warzone so fundamentally that I'm just not willing to do it. You wouldn't be able to set up defenses at an area where you want a forward base, before setting up the forward base. You wouldn't be able to easily defend your remote oil derricks. You couldn't dropship a bunch of trucks (or engineers, in MP) and immediately start setting up, etc etc...

Are build points a measure of the supplies it's carrying or a measure of how fast it can construct? One fix at a time though. See what having the Command Center required for MG Tower does to truck rushing first. If that's not enough, then bring in the Ultruck and weaken the Construck. I'm TVR on the annoyance it would introduce to the game, unless it was only a passive upgrade, like Adv. Eng, Armor, and Engine upgrades are.

BP = How fast it can construct. See above for why I won't implement the "carrying" idea.

Passive upgrades can't change weight or HP, so that's a no.

Current stats, by the way:

1.10 truck: 10 BP
all cyborg engineers: 5 BP
2.2 truck: 8 BP
2.3 truck: 8 BP
2.3 improved truck: 12 BP

[Kacen]

The only thing I suggest is to keep the name "Angel" in the Short-Range Missile Array.

I'd say call it the Angel Short-Range Missile Array, or Angel SRMA for short.

[Deus Siddis]

Have you played bombs? Bombs were useless in 1.10/2.1, but I made them really powerful in 2.2: They got 3 researchable damage upgrades, they were lightened significantly, they had their base damage increased, and they got really powerful splash attacks. Plasmite in particular pretty much destroys everything in a pretty big radius when fully upgraded.

Alright then, I maybe just didn't give them enough of a shot, I'll try them again.

There's only so far you can extend a T1 weapon line... :/ Upload it again, I'll see if it's worth adding in.

The trouble is I was never able to get it from blender to PIE (or is it WZM now?). Can you do anything with the blend file?

Hover is already stronger than tracks against AT and artillery rounds, and it's now much better against artillery. Considering its speed is like 5x tracks, and speed is pretty important in Warzone, it's fair to increase its vulnerability to all-rounder to as much as wheels.

Fair enough.

I might up it to 9, but it's really not intended to be long-range artillery.

Says who though? This is a rebalance, who cares what pumpkin intended for one odd-ball weapon back in 1.10. Plus these are an indirect fire missile weapon, they deserve at least as much range as a pepperpot. Rocket artillery has better range than cannon artillery in every other comparison, this weapon system just makes no sense the way it is.

Well, you know how you need a Command Center before you can make a new tank design to manufacture? This is kind of the same idea, only with structure designs for building.

That was a HORRIBLE game design spill-over from Command & Conquer.

With CnC, you had to build a sat uplink building to get a mini map, which is purely a UI convenience! That's right, you had to build something in game just to get the UI to work right and be easy to use. You couldn't actually see anything that you couldn't without it, you just got a mini-map so that you didn't have to glance around the map as much.

Warzone was made right near the end of the CnC clone era, before people started making their own improvements to RTS, instead of just copying CnC. And so Warzone absorbed the insane "a good UI is a privilege that must be defended in-game" thing by making your mini-map dependent on the Command Center.

And then they decided to take it another leap further and made the design interface dependent on the god damned Command Center. So you have to do all your designing ASAP and clutter up your vehicle build menus so that you don't lose access to your options when the CC get's bombed.

The Command Center should just be an "operations booster" that when intact gives a 20% boost to research, production and power generation. Instead it is a horseshit nuisance and game design abomination.

In the early game, when you have MG Viper Wheels, trucks feel pretty hard to kill.

2.2 is also pretty frustrating for lancer users, as they're completely useless against enemy cyborg engineers.

Yeah well, that is why I said make mini-pod rockets anti-cyborg. Problem solved. "Lancer players" shouldn't exist, they should be assorted missile players that have to use more than one weapon system for their skirmishing. You said you made lancers and their derivs almost useless against cyborgs, so now there is a real place for an anti-cyborg missile system.

As I suggested to Troman, let's just make pod rockets a separte line from the lancer line, and make it the missile against cyborgs. That's what pod rockets are in real life about anyway- light targets, not tanks. We can have the mini-pod and dual mini-pod early game, and then an advanced mini-pod replacement and dual version of that in the later game.

[Per]

The only thing I suggest is to keep the name "Angel" in the Short-Range Missile Array.

I'd say call it the Angel Short-Range Missile Array, or Angel SRMA for short.

The whole point of the rename is to remove the confusion that derives from people's expectation that it will be long-range like its more famous Arch-namesake. If Angel is in there somewhere, that will give the wrong impression.

[zoid]

New "Improved Truck" (better name welcome) with 12 build points, 100 HP, and 500 weight. Prereq: Improved Engineering

Heavy Truck.

The whole point of the rename is to remove the confusion that derives from people's expectation that it will be long-range like its more famous Arch-namesake. If Angel is in there somewhere, that will give the wrong impression.

Ripple Rockets are basically the old Angel, so why not just rename them Angels and give them the angel model and texture? The new Short Range Rockets could take the Ripples' texture because that texture looks like a bigger MRL anyways.

[TVR]

... That's strange, everyone liked the idea when I posted it in my mini-pod thread... ...

Indeed, but you could assume everyone who supported it in the minipod thread still supports it.

The Archie currently has much lower range than it used to have - it's currently only a bit higher than the Ripple Rockets (i.e. about half what it used to be).

There's no point in using Archangel over Groundshaker or Hellstorm or even Scourge, these three are much more effective against units than a single indirect-homing volley.

The niche that Archangel filled was CB against howitzers, or as an endgame strategic anti-base weapon.

... I dislike relying on luck or microing to evade artillery ...

None of the artillery in the Warzone has viable target prediction, a hover tank in motion is nearly invulnerable, but it's still not a heavy weapons platform.

... Remember, this is a change to bust late-game stalemates - situations where the enemy usually has fields of 800 artillery emplacements ...

A mobile Archangel is the best weapon against enemy batteries, if batteries happen to be Archangels, then it's doomed to fall during the reload cycle.

VTOL-bunker buster works as well, unless there happens to be another massive battery of AA in front of the artillery battery, but then that would be vulnerable to attacking artillery.

... the best way to fix it is to have a very artillery-resistant unit type, and hover fits the bill perfectly.

Tracks deserves being artillery resistant more than Hover, then you could choose to either resist heavy artillery fire with tracks in order to bring heavy weapons up to bear, or simply avoid it with hover while mounting lightweight missiles.

... Remember, 60% is not considerable damage ...

It's 3 times greater than 20%, this makes bunker-buster VTOLs considerable for use against hover tanks, when they should be useless.

... this would make it a bit too much of a target ...

It would tie in with the Command Centre as a prerequisite for defences, and make Nexus' thermite bombing on the command centre in Gamma 1 logical.

Three different weapon upgrades exist, and upgraded weapon turrets still exist as well.

The difference is that weapon upgrades are flat-rate, while upgraded turrets cost more than the original.

... you have to recycle your repair turrets and sensors when the new version comes out, too. And not to mention your tanks, which you have to recycle all the time ...

There is no limit on repair turrets or sensors, and recycling tanks is for experience in Campaign, and energy in MP.

However, construction units neither have experience nor significant energy cost, explain if you would, what an upgraded construction turret would have over regular construction upgrades.

... You couldn't dropship a bunch of trucks (or engineers, in MP) and immediately start setting up, etc etc ...

I left out a small portion of the original text:

... It may even be possible to extend this transport function to a tactical airlift VTOL turret ...

Instead of 'flying trucks', simply airlift the prefabs & a truck on to the landing zone.

[Kacen]

Ripple Rockets are basically the old Angel, so why not just rename them Angels and give them the angel model and texture? The new Short Range Rockets could take the Ripples' texture because that texture looks like a bigger MRL anyways.

The Ripple Rockets and Archangels really have more in common with each other than they do with Angels.

They're both used the same way.

Angels are used like late-game mini-pod rocket artillery.

I understand the confusion though, I think it's mainly because of the texture and how it comes in late-game.

As long as it's called Angel Short-Range Missile Array, I think people should remain unconfused. I just suggested keeping the name Angel there so old time Warzone players like me and others don't get confused ourselves...well maybe not confused, just, well, we like the old name.