Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

Hmm, I'm a newbie so I acknowledge that my opinions don't carry too much weight, but here they are anyway:

1) It seems to me that we need to decide early so whether or not we are willing to allow the changes to be so drastic as to require rewriting the stock AI. Is it even feasible / realistic / practical to consider only changes that don't require any rewriting of the stock AI?

2) I disagree with the suggestion that we can ignore AI issues on the basis that everyone on this forum plays PBW. If we want this to be considered stock SEIV we had better consider stock AI issues.

3) If AIs are going to be changed at all, I think it would be good if they could rewritten to be the best AI they could possibly be.

4) With regards to the balancing of missiles, how come no one suggested upping the seekers' damage resistance?

P.S. Why isn't TDM included in stock SEIV in the first place? Makes me skeptical about MM accepting a balance mod as stock.

[ July 24, 2003, 05:11: Message edited by: deccan ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Because TDM is fan made, and was made after SEIV was released. (I assume you mean Vanilla SEIV, not SEIV Gold when you said Stock SEIV.)

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This isn't a bad idea. You would have to increase the cargo capacity of Fighter Bays accordingly. Cargo Bays may then need a tiny tweak as well.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually, this would have practically no impact at all on the mid game, since reasearching up to level 4 is only a matter of four turns, the actual research is negligible.

If range was decreased as suggested and research cost drastically increased (like to 50k for level 1) then you might see some mid-game impact. But changing the research cost by that much is probably problematic for ai designs.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Oh, I didn't realize that we are talking stock AI only here. It wasn't clear from SJ's orginal post:
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nevermind then.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, the reason behind this is quite simple. The UF doesn't use combat sensors. It changes combat tactics during the game. Pre-Talisman: seekers and ramming; Talisman: direct fire.
While I agree that custom AI can be (and sometimes must be) revised, it is a different issue whether this is done after an official patch or to accomodate a mod. Don't expect to have all the AI modders jump through the hoops that you present for them.

change of topic:
----------------

Here is another proposal for PPB. Similar to Geo's, but with range reduction. Btw, this is copied from the DevnullMod data files. I consider this quite balanced.

Research Cost: 10k
Weapon Damage At Rng := 30 25 25 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Weapon Damage At Rng := 35 30 30 25 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Weapon Damage At Rng := 45 40 40 35 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Weapon Damage At Rng := 50 45 45 40 40 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Weapon Damage At Rng := 60 55 55 55 50 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

A severe increase in research cost like 50k, is going way overboard IMHO.

just my 0.02
Rollo

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually, I meant SEIV Gold, as in, why weren't the improved TDM AIs incorporated into stock AIs in official MM patches.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually, I meant SEIV Gold, as in, why weren't the improved TDM AIs incorporated into stock AIs in official MM patches.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Maybe noone asked? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

I have no idea. This whole idea may not have a chance of getting added as stock. But if it's not done it for sure wont have a chance.

Geoschmo

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">To be fair you may have understood SJ perfectly. He and I don't neccesarily agree 100% on every point. One of purposes of this discussion is to try and formulate consensus and compromise on issues where people don't agree totally.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ok, that's not the first time I have mentioned something that turns out to have been in the Devnull Mod. I really did help you with that mod didn't I? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Obviously my memory stinks.

Geoschmo

[ July 24, 2003, 13:07: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Um. If it's a simple thing like making sure the AI uses both regular combat sensors AND the Talisman ... wouldn't it be possible to simply include updated AI for the stock races, with the balance mod ... ?

That'd work WRT the QR, as well.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You could, but would you need to? The point of my comment that you quoted is that the stock AI's would work quite well with no changes at all. At least for these two changes.

Geoschmo

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">With stats like those, why ever choose the Meson BLaster? Compare PPB V to MB VI, adjusted for size:

PPB: 60 55 55 55 50 50
MB: 52 52 52 52 52 52

Adjusted cost is:
PPB: 500 mineral, 300 rad
MB: 450 mineral, 180 rad

The PPB is significantly better at point blank, and about the same at max range. And the PPB skips shields This is a huge advantage in the mid game.

Maybe increase the Rad cost even more for the PPB, or reduce the damage some at level 5. As is, it just out-powers everything else in the mid-game by a very large margin.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

[quote]Originally posted by spoon:

Quote:

With stats like those, why ever choose the Meson BLaster? Compare PPB V to MB VI, adjusted for size:

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes but you are ignoring cost and research in that comparison. Well, maybe not ignoring cost, but discounting it for sure. By increasing the research costs for the PPB as most people are suggesting you allow the MB player to get to the upper level weapon much sooner then the PPB player. Even as it is now the MB player will have MB 2 to 4 before the PPB player even starts researching PPB because of the extra research involved in getting Physics 2. Raising the research costs and lowering the range of the eraly PPB pushes them back into thte late mid game before they start becoming a factor. Which gives the MB more time to be a decent weapon choice.

In retrospect perhaps Malfador should have pushed the energy stream weapons to Physics 2 and the Phased energy weapons back to physics 3. Making a change like that now though would cause some problems with the AI research files for sure.

In the end though yes the PBB catches and passes it on a damage per KT space ratio. I don't think that is neccesarily a bad thing. Even then though it's a more expensive weapon, so the MB player should be able to build more ships then the PPB player. The cost difference doesn't seem much, but multiplied by the number of weapons per ship it can make a significant difference in fleet size.

There are other ways to acchieve balance besides damage/Kt ratio and range.

Geoschmo

[ July 24, 2003, 17:55: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Much sooner? More like 2-3 turns earlier, which is why I discounted it. Mid game research is generally around 100k, no?

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, I guess that depends on who is playing. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Geoschmo

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, if the Talisman is supposed to be +100 in addition to Combat Sensors, then, using Talisman without those sensors (uniformly, rather than in special cases) would produce a sub-optimal result.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes indeed. Why choose Meson BLaster at all? *shrugs*

Personally, in unmodded SE4 I never do. It dead ends too soon and has a very narrow window of usefulness IMO. But just because Meson BLaster is underpowered, doesn't mean that PPB should be as well. That would leave only APB as king.

I think Mesons should be upped in some way. Double damage to shields, perhaps? Or increase damage, range, lower cost, whatever.

Rollo

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This is what I'd do:
Increase range to 8, Give it +10% to hit, and reduce the rad cost from 120 to 40. The reduced rad cost will help it compete against the PPB, and the increased range will help it against the APB.

Conversely, if the PPB is significantly weakened, the Meson BLaster wouldn't have to change as much, and the APB can be tuned down a little.

At some point, we should probably go weapon by weapon, since balance is so inter-connected.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Make the Talisman a +125 to hit in the same family as the standard Combat Sensors. Then, it still gives an additional 60%, the AI would automatically use it when available, and humans couldn't double-dip with a CS-Talisman combo.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I don't think the objective was to make the AI use both. The 100% talisman by itself would be superior to a ship with only normal combat sensors. But not as superior as the current never miss talisman is. I think that was the objective.

Although if we you wanted the AI to use both, you are correct it would be a minor change and we could even include it with the mod.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think we need to make the PPB a little weaker and teh MB a little stronger. Either by itself doesn't address the problem. Changing either one drastically causes new problems.

The following is an editorial comment... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Of course this is only opinion and anyone is free to disagree with me.

I like the idea of different weapons being superior to others at different times in the game. I think that was the intention of Aaron from looking at the files. The DUC in the early game, then torpedoes, then Meson BLaster, then PPB, and Lastly APB. Each should have it's own particular time during the game when it is the superior weapon choice, based on the time it takes to research it.

It's not a problem for me that the early game weapons are ultimatly outclassed on a one for one basis. Although there should be a cost factor there that allows them to still be at least partially competitive if you can take advantage of it by presenting your enemy with a superiority of numbers.

The problem is in the execution. For whatever reason it's clear that the PPB comes into it's own too early in the game. Thus making the Torps and MB pretty much irrelevant during the time in the game when they should rule. And the PPB and APB are too strong, or not expensive enough to allow the early game wepons to retain even an advantage in numbers at the end.

By tweaking all four of these ( I think the consensus is the DUC's are pretty good as they are) we should be able to acchieve a balance like this.

The remaining direct fire weapons would be your "niche" weapons, good for ceratin situations, but not the basis of your military, and your seekers which are different classes alltogether.

Of course everyone else idea of balance may be totally different then mine and they are free to think I am nuts. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Geoschmo

[ July 24, 2003, 19:36: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

I go away for a couple of days and look what happens... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Time for some reading!

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

If PPB is weakened, then normal shields are usefull also in the later part of game. Would it confuse the AI if normal and phased shields has different family numbers?

Does anybody find out a way to make other scanners than hyper optics usefull without big modifications? Perhaps those with higher research cost would be cheaper/smaller?

And finally I'd like to modify the order of components in components.txt. It won't affect the AI for sure http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif I know there are the comp type Groups but I still like all armors one after another (normal, scattering, stealth, emissive, perhaps even racial armories). Also I'd like the solar sail after engines. I think there are more improvements but I have to check them out.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

How about making PPBs 75% as effective as APB 4-8 (IE: 75% as much damage)? This sticks with 5 levels, and makes them start at about the same point as if the player had reasearched APBs instead of Physics 2. Stopping with APB level 8 means they won't be anywhere near as powerful as late-game APBs.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Your opinion is as valid and useful as everyone else's.

I agree that organizing the comps better is a good idea. It looks like everything was just thrown on the end of the list when Aaron thought of them. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Check Adamant Mod for a reorganizing possibility.

[ July 24, 2003, 21:32: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

A -5 damage to the APB would result in the MB being slightly better at ranges 4-6.

A moderate increase in PPB cost
The smoothing out of the PPB damage improvements at levels 2&3 as suggested before.
A 5% to 10% negative to the to-hit would be enough to make it a fair choice IMO.



What would be a good change for the Hellbore?
Changing Graviton Hellbore to skip all shields, perhaps?

[ July 24, 2003, 21:35: Message edited by: Suicide Junkie ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

We should add 3 more levels of Armor components, with increasing HPs. Armor should always be a viable alternative to shields, with each having their own uses.

In fact, it would IMO be a good idea to make Armor come in 1 kT chunks, and have more HPs than Shield Generators make. This allows the Armor ships to win the first battle, but have lots less defense left for the next ones. The shield ships have fewer HPs to start with, but get their defenses for every battle. Sort of like in P&N mod. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Of course, that system is very different from stock SE4, so we may not want it for a balance mod. But, having 3 more levels of the Armor comps (no new tech areas) would be a great idea.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Probably doubling its damage and making it skip all shields would be good. It does a lot less damage than MBs, PPBs, APBs, etc. at short ranges, and almost nothing at long ones. Make it killer at short range, but get really weak at long ranges (same rate of damage attenuation it has now works nicely for this). Ofc, the Ripper Beam should do even more damage than the GHB (a lot more, maybe 50% more), as it has very short range. This creates vastly different combat options for these weapons (esp. with the different ROF).

[ July 24, 2003, 21:58: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

I think we should make the first 2-3 levels of phased shields be a little better. All that it does is screw the AIs, who will use them as soon as they get Shields 6, thus creating ships with far fewer HPs (even less than if they used Armor), as well as just making you wait longer with some useless intermediate techs.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

Massive Planetary Shield Generators should have cost divided by 10 and shields generated multiplied by 10. They are extremeley useless as they are now because it takes a really long time to build them, and they provide not even enough shielding to delay a couple of LCs for very long.

RE: Mineral Scanners and such

I suggest we make the specific resource ones go 15/30/45, while the Robotoids remain 10/20/30. It makes sense that if you are using 3x as much space, you should get something out of it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I suggest all Research Centers be made to generate 50 intel points so that you can get some counter intel possibility in the early game without having an intel-making ally. It makes no sense that a world of ~4 billion people is completely open to sabotage with absolutely ZERO chance of doing anything to reduce the effects or anything like that. This greatly increases balance and makes it so that he who gets Applied Intel first does not get on as much of an overwhelming lead. Still has a big lead, but is not omnipotent on the Intel front.

[ July 24, 2003, 21:50: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That's certainly a valid approach. But even if that was the direction this mod goes, I would still argue that PPBs (like Null-Space) should be a niche weapon rather than a Main Line weapon. The progression could be DUC --> Meson BLaster --> APB. Each representing an improvement on the latter, reflected both in cost of research and resources.

That said, however, I would much prefer there to be choices at each stage of the game rather than a simple formula to follow.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I hate this idea.

It TOTALLY nerfs the PPB. It turns it into a niche weapon that is only usefull if you are facing an enemy with non-phased shields. What you end up with in comparison to the APB is a weapon that takes much more research to get intially, costs twice as much and is less effective from the start, never gets any closer in damage and falls way behind in damage and range by the end because the APB branch is so much longer.

The only time the PPB would be advantageous would be agaisnt normal shields, and the heavy research costs means that the APB player can keep up in shield tech, getting phased shields about the time the PPB gets PPB, and the APB player will be ahead in weapons tech.

The only redeeming quality of this idea is that it so neuters the PPB that people will stop using it. Over time this will translate into more players using shields and stopping with the high end normal shields. The sneaky player inside me sees this as an opportunity to pull a switch on someone at a crucial moment in a game and catch their heavily normally shielded fleet with their pants down. But this would depend so much on timing and luck that it could almost be classified as a desperation move. The player that depends on this as a strategy is going to lose a lot more then they win.

Geoschmo

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

Geo, that is EXACTLY how PPBs worked in SE3, and they worked beautifully there IMO. They should not be a mainline weapon, they should be a support type weapon, only useful in some situations. As it is now, they are so powerful that they become main line weapons, with really no decisions to make at all. Increasing choices to be made is ALWAYS a good idea (except when you increase from 30 to 40 choices or something ludicrous, ofc http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ).

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What you just described is EXACTLY why I think the PPB should be a niche weapon, and not a mainline weapon...

edit: Hey, look, my rating just dropped! Did I offend somebody?

[ July 24, 2003, 22:16: Message edited by: spoon ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

Spoon, that was exactly the point of my suggestion (as per my previous post http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif ). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

I'll definitely start an SE3 mod later on.

However, minor changes only here people!

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

I am reading through this thread and I get the sense that mostly weapons are out of balance. I have to disagree.
What main features make the game unbalanced?
Are there any setup that favor one stratgy over another?
(KOTH everyone wants max ATTACK and DEFENSE)
Are you aiming to make everything balanced at every point in the Game? at this point I can see
1 Talisman toned down
2 the Planet shields helped
3 Point defense toned down
4 Sensors changed

Why would you mess with the weapons?
Has any one gotten into a long game?
And has anyone used All the tech you can research?

I really get the feeling that this thread is getting wrapped around the Weapons axial.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

That is because the weapons system has a lot of major holes in it... only APBs (out of non-racial weapons) are very effective in large games. There, efficiency is king. APBs get the most bang for the buck and the most bang for the size, and so win out in pretty much all situations (except some rare WP defense situations, but then, those defender ships suck in other locations).

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

Yes Fyron, the organization of the components in Adamant mod is done well. Devnullmod has also nice arrangement and more stock SE4 components (easier to copy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

One thing which also should be changed is supply amount that supply storages can store. At the beginning of the game it's ridiculous that you can squeeze an engine and 500 supply to 10kT but it requires 20kT to store nothing but 500 supply. And even if you have supply storage III engines can still store the same amount of supply per kT.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

It does not take long at all to reorganize the comps. In fact, I shall make a Version ordered about the same as Adamant right now, in case we want to use it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Actually, as Rollo pointed out in #se4, reordering the comps will cause all savegames to not be upgradeable, so if we are to get this to be used for stock SE4, reordering isn't going to happen. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ July 24, 2003, 23:57: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, I cetainly can see your point, I just disagree with it. In my mind having several basically equal weapons to choose from at any one time isn't really important. Yes it gives you a choice, but which choice you make is irrelevant. Since each one is more or less equal, they become interchangeable.

With the type of balance I am suggesting you still have choices. Any of the mainline weapons could be valid options at the end of the game, but they wouldn't be equal on a one for one basis. Different weapons would require different stratagies to take advantage of their strengths. One better at short range, one at long. One good for small fleets of powerful but expensive warships. One better for massive fleets of cheap, expendable "cannon fodder". I'll admit my vision of balance would be much harder to acchieve, but in my opinion it lends for a richer game.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If you guys want to have a discussion about whether or not the PPB should have remained a niche weapon in SE4, I may end up agreeing with you. But the fact is it is not a niche weapon for SE4, and hasn't been for almost three years now. It's asking a lot to get people to accept totally nerfing the weapon now at this late date.

Personally I don't care. As I said the game to me is more about strategy then weapon choice. But the only way this has a shot of working is if it's not strongly objectionable to a large percentage of the players. Not to mention any of the stock AI's that are designed aroung the PPB as a mainline weapon, I believe there are at least a couple, will have to be totally reworked, research and designs.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I agree with you to a point, but I think by making smaller changes to them instead of totally nerfing them we can give players some more descisions to make without taking away the PPB as a mainline weapon option.

Remember this mod is all about concensus and compromise. Six months ago I was insisting that PPB were fine as they are and didn't need changed. Part of me still believes that, but in the interests of actually getting something accomplished I am attempting to reach a middle ground. But your position is a bit to radical for me. It's fine and all for you and you are free to do it in your mods. I might even like it in a mod. But trying to wedge that much change into the stock game, or even into a general widely distributed balance mod is going to be a tough sell.

Geoschmo

[ July 25, 2003, 00:33: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Such as?

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Such as?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Such as what I suggested earlier in this thread, and what others have suggested as well. Increasing the research costs somewhat. Smoothing out the giant jumps between level 1 and 2 for starters. Perhaps decreasing the range in the earlier levels and making the weapon a bit more expensive. And perhaps even a small overall decrease in power at every level. Not suggesting all of those, but any two or three would do a lot to make give the other weapons more of a shot of being decent choices in comparison.

Geoschmo

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

From what I've seen and heard here, ISTM that most of the weapons are actually quite reasonably balanced. The ones being discussed, at least.

The adjustments to low-level PPB in particular, are minor changes I think we can agree on, have little overall effect, but are nice to have.
Perhaps a small weakening of APB would be good as well, but very small changes.

Now, what do we do with GHB, torpedoes and High Energy Discharge weapons?
Once the weapons are out of the way, we can move to concentrate on other things.

---

One interesting idea from IRC is to reduce the cost of the Quantum reactor to a trivial amount.
The idea being that we should embrace the reactor as part of SE3 and 4, and make things fairer between Humans and AIs... with less cost, the AI won't suffer as much, and the Humans will be encouraged to use it more like the AIs do on many if not all ships.

----------

Summary
Unsorted Issues
</font>

• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Massive Planetary shields much too weak and expensive</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Hyper Optics too easy/cheap to get vs other options.</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">One-resource bonus facilities have no advantage over All-three bonus facilities. </font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Fighters & Missiles too weak / PDC to powerful</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Climate Control Facilities too weak</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Medical Lab plague prevention effect too low</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Talisman too powerful</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Quantum Reactors too powerful</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">PDC, PPB too powerful</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Torpedoes, Graviton Hellbore, Incinerator, too weak.</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ship Training too powerful</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Not enough room for Weapon Platforms</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">High level Intel ops too effective</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">All of the new damage types not used</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Fighter Rocket pods -> Seekers?</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Supply Storage should count as Cargo for ship restrictions.
  </font>

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Trivial Changes:
</font>

• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Move Standard Armor to below Stealth, scattering and emissive for the benefit of AI.</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Reduce Price of Quantum reactor to benefit AI
  </font>

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Minor Changes:
</font>

• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Move Standard Armor to below Stealth, scattering and emissive , and add SA components with tech requirements of up to 6 (either identical to SA3, or reduced cost) for the benefit of AI.</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Smoothing of low level PPB improvements as below.
  </font>

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Moderate Changes:
</font>

• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Increase in PPB research cost as below.</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Make standard Training Facilities System-wide for the benefit of AIs. Psychic Trait Version trains 2x as fast to keep it worthwhile.
  </font>

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Suggestions of note:
</font>

• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Phased Polaron Beam Average Adjustment</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Research Cost: 15k
  Weapon Damage At Rng := 30 25 25 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
  Weapon Damage At Rng := 35 30 30 25 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
  Weapon Damage At Rng := 45 40 40 35 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
  Weapon Damage At Rng := 50 45 45 40 40 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
  Weapon Damage At Rng := 60 55 55 55 50 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0</pre><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"></font>

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

[ July 25, 2003, 00:41: Message edited by: Suicide Junkie ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Such as?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Such as the ones that he already proposed.

EDIT: /me is just too slow...

[ July 25, 2003, 00:38: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

How bad would it be if we just give the torps a ROF of 1? I am too tired to do the math right now, but would that make them an uber weapon or something?

Geoschmo

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

2.5 damage per kt per turn. Yes, they would be uberweapons at that point.

They have been ROF 2 since SE3, so I'm quite sure they should stay that way.

Perhaps if the damage was brought up to 1.4 or 1.5, then they would be good for the one-shot pulse damage... 50% more damage than close range APB, but 100% longer reload time.

Adding 20 damage per torpedo would do it.
AMT 1 has only 30 damage/2 range, while Quantum V has 100 damage/6 range. All are 40kt in size, and reload of 2 turns.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">hmm, yes I think they would become too powerful then (also without doing the math)

one thing I don't like about this is that will give us 'yet another ROF 1" weapon.

Torpedoes don't need much tweaking either methinks. They are a good niche weapon and underestimated by most, I think.

The good thing about them is that they don't target units. Many people are using dedicated PD ships vs. units and seeker. Well, Torpedo ships are dedicated ship killers. None of their shots will be wasted on lesser targets. This can actually swing a battle in their favor.

Rollo

[ July 25, 2003, 00:53: Message edited by: Rollo ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

PS: When upping the damage of Torpedoes, one has to keep some racial weapons in mind. Acid Globe, for example.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

will you adjust the cost of ppb.

as the cost of ppb is the current balance on it.

PPB fleets are expensive to maintain. Hence where the MB has some equalness....

If your going to adjust the stats then perhaps the cost should be adjusted as well.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, I think the prevailing opinion seems to be that the cost as it is does not do enough to balance it.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, I cetainly can see your point, I just disagree with it. In my mind having several basically equal weapons to choose from at any one time isn't really important. Yes it gives you a choice, but which choice you make is irrelevant. Since each one is more or less equal, they become interchangeable.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Heh, that is so much the opposite of my point, I am forced to put one of those eyeball-rolling guys in my post... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif In fact, it appears that you say you want balance and choices, but your suggestions don't really live up to that. You want minor tweaks and the game to stay basically as is. There is nothing wrong with that, but don't try to sell it as a "vision of balance".

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No, you are suggesting that the PPB is fine as is, but that you would put up with a minor change as compromise. The game, as it is, does not give you significant strategic choice. You have PPBs for the mid game, and APBs for the late game.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This is what I have been arguing for when I mention giving each weapon a role or a niche. I am glad we can agree on that! However, in order to do that, you have to be willing to make more changes than you seem willing to concede. Again, that is a fine approach, and if this mod wants to lean in that direction, that is fine, but don't fool yourself into thinking you are addressing the main issues of game balance.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This does seem to be the way SJ is leaning as well. I disagree with it, and think the game would be better without such a dominant mid-game weapon. However, if you want to avoid doing any major changes, then, yeah, tweak it a little and see if it makes a difference. Always room for iteration, I suppose.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This is the best reason to leave the PPB only slightly diminished in power. It's a good one, but it makes me think that perhaps we need a Human-Only Balance Mod as well, since so many good changes that have been suggested (for QR, Talisman, etc) won't work well with the AI. It is proving to be too much of a limiting factor, I think, to make the current mod as useful as it could be.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">From what I've heard, there is still a lively debate...heh