Warzone 2100 Forums

Hello everybody !

The 2.3.8 version should come pretty soon. As usual there is our chance to make some small adjustements in the game stats from our game experience of the last month. It's Per that will have the last word and merge the final proposition into the game stats, but apparently i might be the one that make that proposition.

So i made a proposition of balance from my own experience in game, my CTT mod evaluator (that highlighted some odd things out and helped me adjust exactly the weapons) and of course the feedbacks and requests from players on irc that helped me with proposition and some tests play.

Here is the ticket where can find all the changes I made : http://developer.wz2100.net/ticket/2687

Now i think that all those changes are reasonnable, but per that didn't played that much in multiplayer (FWIK), I think, is affraid to accept unecessary changes. So I need your voice to tell him that the change I made go in the good direction and fix more then brakes things.

Also, the discussion is still open if there is some stuff that I forgot, but please remember that this is not a mod and it's supposed to be very very soft changes. Any request like a indirect fire machine gun with a huge splash and that put things in fire will be ignored .

what i have tested(and like) or find necessary

Thermal armor accessible earlier
Green bodies had a serious boost in hp.
Plasmite bomb splash and incent damage reduced by 25%.
Mini-pod range increased from 8 to 9 , ROF+9%

thanks to iluvalar for this early balance testing! flamers in 3.7 have gotten to strong, the only way i know to beat them is also to make flamers(that includes plasmite bombs). its kinda sad that the mini pods are currently just here to get rockets. so its nice to have them as an option for an early weapon. tmp

Is this going to affect templates, assignweapons and names.txt? I'd love to know about this ahead of time so that the Cam-4 Team can prepare.

Multiplayer has its own templates, assignweapons and names.txt, so they don't conflict with anything in campaign. Unless you use the MP, ones, that is...?

I haven't picked apart the .wz file to know for sure, but none of these changes look like they should affect templates, assignweapons, or names.

Goth Zagog-Thou wrote:Is this going to affect templates, assignweapons and names.txt? I'd love to know about this ahead of time so that the Cam-4 Team can prepare.

I believe the only dependency that will be affected is between weapon.txt and redcomponent.txt .

Excellent, thanks guys. ^_^

whaat does this means ? "single MG does not more become obsolete"

I think all early AA need little boost in dam. AA guns +15 - 20% to dam, sun burst ~ 20%, Flak 20-25% or increase ROF + 30%

Terminator wrote:whaat does this means ? "single MG does not more become obsolete"

Only that it will not disapear from the design screen. When you build machinegunner borgs in the factory, you will be able to cancel them to produce assaultgunner instead.

The reason is the low price of the mg and it's relative high HP. One could want to use them as a meat shield

Also useful to make scout VTOLs.

Axel wrote:I think all early AA need little boost in dam. AA guns +15 - 20% to dam, sun burst ~ 20%, Flak 20-25% or increase ROF + 30%

You are right, but you are also wrong all at the same time. If i believe in my equations, both sunburst and cannon flak have fair stats. they are 333% stronger then the weapon that lead to them (respectively lancer and hyper velocity cannon). If you add to that the relative high price of a vtol you get like 5 time for your money. And that's fair.

But at that time space, there is no much vtols around and they dont hold those terrible bomb bays. When you reach the time where you really need an AA these 2 are now obsolete by about (your right) 15-35% or so. But if i give that boost right away as you ask, i'll brake even more the strategy of going for vtols as an alt by mounting your standard weapon on it. Because they'll face overpowered AA for that time. I dont want to brake that anymore because vtols are already rare and i believe that those vtols are not just made for bombing.

I believe we should push both sunburst and flak cannon later in the tech tree, so you get them a bit in the hurry but at least they really worth what you pay for them when you need them. It's a matter of timing not of brute stats power. You can get rid of early bombers or vtols with a bit more of hyper velocity or borg lancer.

But I dont think I have the power here and now to make that kind of bigger and more dangerous changes and moving stuff in the tech tree. We should talk about that sooner next time and make more tests.

Iluvalar: i believe you're forgetting the fact that cannon branch's multipliers against VTOLs are two times worse than those of rocket branch (and this gets even worse due to armor). This makes me believe flak cannon should be much better compared to HPV than Sunburst compared to lancer.

Keep note that all dedicated AA weapons, including Flak Cannon, get the AT damage type.

Ok, i will be the "bad" guy here - i am used to that

* Thermal armor accessible earlier
(in general either that or flamer damage reduction by 10 percent)
(on a side note, is it intended that flamers "penetratable" property means that they will even do damage (visually as well as on the units itself) above maximum range? - meaning: firing a flamer in a group flames the first, the second behind... and so on ... and also above maximum range, i guess thats intended?)
so: agreed

* Twin assault cannon splash damage reduced
(why? for cannon diversification? if for that there should be more changes to other cannon types as well.)
If not for that reason: disagree

* Green bodies had a serious boost in hp.
(why? because nobody who knows the game uses them? i doubt a change in hp will change that, reasons: velocity, thermal armor. all it does, is helping the "no vtol" games ending.)
so: disagree (unless i am missing a point here)

* PepperPot 50% boost (trough both rof and dmg)
(in general a good idea cause bombard was better than pepperpot before. But still it wont help that weapon to be used more, you will have ripples earlier and easily outrange them (on most maps).) (to sum it up: changes are needed, but maybe artillery in general needs some thoughts (e.g. would be good to end the needle gun line with an artillery too probably))
so: disagree

* Plasmite bomb splash and incent damage reduced by 25%.
(a totally different approach and not a very good one (in my opinion - and i might be the only one). Plasmite bombs (before the "reappearance of armor") were a "good" end game weapon. They were not overpowered cause in general you would loose as much "money" as you destroyed. This, of course, is now different cause they will survive longer. To get the same effect as before you should only reduce speed (increase weight of bombs) instead of reducing plasmite bomb splash and damage. And NO! i am not a plasmite VTOL noob, thanks )
so: in general change is needed, but not damage/splash, -> disagree

* Heavylaser HP halved and price halved
(again: why? because that weapon is rarely used i guess. The reason is not the HP but the weight (velocity) of such units. So if the reason is to see more of them in games, you should adjust weight. The price halved is still a reasonable change because its just a little better than scourge. Maybe a reduction of 30-40 percent is enough)
in general: agreed.

* single MG does no more become obsolete
agreed.

* Mini-pod range increased from 8 to 9 , ROF+9%
(now, while my opinion is that this change is due to the fact that cannons are better during that time, i still _strongly_ disagree. There is only a short time frame during which you have an advantage with cannons. Additionally you get easier AA and artillery with missiles so there should be a downside to it. and increasing pod rof means also increasing lancer rof (and yes, i am the missile guy) which is not a good idea for the missile/cannon balance.)
a strong: disagree.

* Sunburst and Cannon flak emplacement price reviewed -50$ (not much I'm affraid)
(you should not be afraid of that change. Anything beyond is _very_ unreasonable. At least while we are maxed with 5 labs (i hope that this will not change in 3.0). Paying research time is a factor that cannot be accounted for easily. And paying for sunburst/flak research wise is like paying nothing so you should pay for the emplacement in order not to destroy balance.)
i think, its not really needed, therefore: disagree.

While this sound like i dont like any changes that is not true. I just think that most changes are not needed or incomplete without changing other stuff as well. And, in disagreement with many other people, i think the game is quite balanced (subtracting plasmite vtols from that).

Hope you will not be too disappointed...

ger


EDIT: For most points my disagreement can be neglected because i was convinced that it won't hurt. Indeed, i found all but one point minor adjustments and were only disagreeing because i thought it would not have the effect intended (due to several reasons). But without trying, noone will know and i am sure that neither change will unbalance the game a lot and therefore give it a try. Only for plasmite VTOLs i am still of the opinion that its better to make them slower (and therefore more vulnerable) instead of weaker. End-game-weapons are what they are... overpowered and mean. I know a lot of people will disagree with my idea of plasmite bombs but i hope, too, that we will soon again see other games than plasmite bomb rushs. In total the changes are adressing the correct areas that need work and will go in the right direction.