Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think both of these are bad ideas. Either one would be fine for humans, but the AI isn't smart enough to use the Talisman more judiciously once it's more expensive. The result would be bankrupcy and military irrelevance for any AI programed to use it. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Great point. Forgot that the ai can't handle significant increases in cost.

The +100% to hit that you and others have suggested does seem a better approach.

Ditto for the Quantum Reactor. If you can't balance it by price or size, then changing its effect is next best...

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">While I like this idea on a personal level, I think it is a risky change to try and get implemented into the stock game. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I agree with Geo (ack, twice in one day). Weakening PDC will go a long way to making missiles more effective. Don't want to overdo it, though it is something to keep our eyes on for future iterations.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

On meson bLasters

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I agree with raising range to 8, but given that it costs much less to research, I think the current damage of 35 is good. (37 would be equal to APB midpoint, so I guess it's moot to argue about...heh)

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think that "reality" shouldn't be the dominant force behind what tweaks are made. That would be a Sim Mod, rather than a Balance Mod. Double true because, really, this is sci-fi, so how can we really say what the characteristics of a "bolt" weapon are?

To that end, I really think some fairly cheap-to-research weapon should have a significant bonus to hit, because it will offer a counter to one of the most common ploys (currently only Kamikaze addresses this, and not very well). Whether or not it is torpedoes doesn't matter to me, but I can't think of a better weapon to fill the slot.

Adding a to hit bonus to torps would then accomplish two things: It would balance the weapon against other weapons (priority one) and it go some way towards making the game more balanced (priority two). Or maybe those priorities are backwards. I dunno!

edit: rephrased the phrase that was poorly phrased.

[ July 23, 2003, 18:18: Message edited by: spoon ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

(Tried to post this before, but Win2K networking crashed and ate my post http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif )

My opinion and spreadsheet analysis and experience are that Meson BLasters are one of the better weapons in the game. One of their advantages compared to APB is low research cost, so the fact that they are inferior to APB in some ways is actually good for balance.

I wouldn't mind if there were a similar but different balanced range 8 weapon, or if they could be researched another 2-4 levels to get range 8, but I wouldn't mess with the existing weapon, as it is a good one as is.

Why talk about Meson BLasters and not mention Graviton Hellbore??? (suckiest weapon of the unmodded game, IMO - should be a shield or an armor skipper, IMO)

I also agree that it'd be good to have a lower-tech weapon with a to-hit bonus (to balance people with too much defense bonus, and make offense minus not unsurvivable).

Torpedoes are too weak, but there are three or more good ways to adjust that. Making them the low-tech-bonus-to-hit weapon is probably a good idea.

PvK

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Hey now, this might be a very good idea. I agree that Meson BLasters are very good early mid game weapon because of their low research and build cost. But I believe they have fallen out of favor because they are jsut too weak in the mid-late game. Giving them a couple more levels is an elegantly simple solution that had not occured to me at all. I like it.

Geoschmo

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually, making it the lowest mount (at least for ships) would work more seamlessly with existing AI. If you change the existing ability to Combat Offense To Hit Plus, the AIs will exclusively use that instead of Combat Sensors. If it were a mount, they would always use it for DF weapons. Either way, ship designs will be built nearly the same (maybe a few extra armor) if no component with that ability exists (unless it is listed as a required ability).

[edit] Adding levels works fine for humans, but the AI won't research them until after finishing their entire research.txt. Someone further back suggested making the range go 3,4,5,6,7,8 instead of 3,4,5,5,6,6; then it has the same number of tech levels.

[ July 23, 2003, 21:24: Message edited by: Krsqk ]

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Wouldn't that make them ai unfriendly, since all ai will stop researching at level 6? Getting them to range 8 with their existing six tech levels is very doable. If you're concerned about the research cheapness, maybe just up Level 1 research cost to 10k or 15k.

Keeping them valid in the late-game seems important, but if the PPB isn't nerfed more than a little, they Meson BLasters remain not-so-good for the mid game, either.

Range 8 Meson BLasters would be the alternative to the late game APB (for those using Max Range), which is also a good thing.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

Yeah, I forgot the AI research files have levels in there. Good point.

Re: SE4 Stock Balance Mod
 

just want to point out that any changes to the Talisman is likely to screw up religious AI.

I assume a lot of designs use the 'always hit' ability (I know the UF does). If such a component is not available it will cripple the AI.

For the PPB discussion: I still believe that PPB V is a well balanced weapon. The lower levels (esp. PPB II) could need some toning down though.

Rollo