Frustration (balance)

[Phoenix-D]

Was messing around with making the ships tougher, and I ended up creating a balance problem. Or so I thought.

See, I made two ships. Identical except one had APBs, the other Wave-Motion guns. Always, 100% of the time, the WMG ship lost. Strategies didn't help.

Tried the same thing with a capital ship missle ship. It died as well.

CSM vs. WMG resulted in a draw; the WMG's point defense killed enough of the CSM's missles that it wasn't able to do enough damage to kill, and the WMG ship rarely if ever got in range.

The APBs and the WMG have identical max ranges as max tech. At max range, the APB is *barely* outdamaged by the wave-motion, while at minimum range the anti-proton beam does much more damage. And you can fit two APBs for every WMG!

What is up with this thing, anyway? I'd change it, but that's not the point of this mod (techmod's that one)

Phoenix-D

[Puke]

if i understand, the question is "why does the WMG suck in contrast with the APB?"

[Baron Munchausen]

Well, there's a problem with balance in general between single turn fire-rate weapons and slower weapons. The intent is that you pay for the greater damage per hit by the slower fire rate. But, if you do the math you will quickly see that the slower firing weapons end up doing far less damage 'average per turn' than the once per turn weapons. Supposedly this is balanced by the greater damage that can be done quickly by the more poweruful hits of the slower weapons, but in practice it rarely works out that way. Increasing their power further can often result in catastrophic events in combat that seem just as unrealistic as the problem you are trying to correct.

Edit: As noted in a later post, Emissive Armor is plainly meant to improve the distinction between frequent firing lower damage weapons and slower firing high damage weapons, but it doesn't work like it's supposed to.

I think we need a much finer 'resolution' in all the ship acounting areas. That is, larger numbers for smaller gradients. Weapons ranges need to be much larger, movement needs to be more per turn (both strategic and combat), the system and combat screens need to be far larger. It's too easy right now for small mistakes to have disproportionate consequences. This would help quite a bit with the various 'balance' problems.

[ 20 December 2001: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

[Phoenix-D]

More like "why is the ABP so powerful?!" (the PPB too, to a slightly lesser extent.

Phoenix-D

[Zarix]

The game balance could be better, but I don't think it is all wrong.

WMG loses when compared to APB when all the other ship components are same. But if WMG ship has more movement points than APB ship it can stay out of range when it is reloading its weapons. That way WMG has an advantage. That isn't very bad strategy because WMG has minimum accuracy of 30% and APB has 0%.

Also if it is clear that your ships are going to be destroyed, you can do more damage with WMG than with APB in that one combat turn your ships survive.

Almost all weapons in SE4 have some qualities that makes them useful in certain situations.

[Zarix]

One thing that gives advantage to slower weapons is crystaline armor. APB for example needs a lot of time to get throught crystaline armor because of the shield regenerative effect. Slower and more damaging weapons are a lot more effective.
Too bad that emissive armor is broken, because it would make the game balance better.

[Growltigga]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zarix:
One thing that gives advantage to slower weapons is crystaline armor.

---

I think the main thing that gives advantage to any slow firing weapon is superior speed over the enemy ships - contra-terrene engines/ the afterburner thingammyjig/race speciality are a must

[mac5732]

Play balance in games is a must, but sometimes hard to accomplish without many hrs of play time.
Weapons that fire every turn should hit at longer distance but do less damage, Larger weapons that do more damage fire less often, In my opinion, I think the problem is more in the amount of damage done at the various ranges. But you also have to take into consideration the defenses on your enemies ships/planets. They are intended to minimize the amount of damage, therefore defense is also thrown into the equation.

On a side note, has anyone noticed in 1.49 SP play that ftrs usage by the AI has become almost non existant? I mean, I've played a number of games of 1.49 and the AI doesn't seem to use CV's like it use to. I haven't had a major ftr battle with the AI like before (it would have a number o CV's and 30-80+ ftrs in a fleet) The only time I now see ftrs is on the AI planets and usually 5-10. This is a balance question if true. I know changes to ftrs were made but did we go to far and made them basically worthless in SP play? Or is it the same but that I just havn't seen it yet?

just some ideas mac

[Growltigga]

quote:

---

Originally posted by mac5732:
On a side note, has anyone noticed in 1.49 SP play that ftrs usage by the AI has become almost non existant? mac

---

Mac, you are scaring the bejeebers out of me.

I am only on my first game (1.49 patch) but the Chryslonite are throwing carriers by the fleet at me, together with swarms of fighters (cue escort destroyer design).

If this is the position on the 1.49 patch, I really am not sure I wanted to try any Version before that if this one is light on fighters!!

[Gryphin]

mac5732 ,
I've only played 6 games so far in SE IV, and not to completetion. I have run into CV's with fighters but the planets seem to be defending with Sat's and CAPs. I have even seen PdCs on panets.

[ 20 December 2001: Message edited by: Gryphin ]