Build 53 balance changelog

Balance discussions for The Nomads.

Moderators: Softly, pip, Brute51, CookieNoob, JJ173, Moritz

Build 53 balance changelog

Postby pip » 10 Dec 2014, 01:02

Build 53 balance changelog

Fixed black texture of wall section
Fixed ACU spawn blast Radius
Fixed t3 mass fabs wrong mass output.

Navy :
- T1 Sub: HP = 575 (from 500) ; DPS reduced to 41 (from 45) but more torpedoes and faster rate of fire (better against torpedo defenses)
- Frigate : rate of fire increased to 3.333 (from 3) DPS = 66 (from 60)

- Cruiser : EMP weapon FiringRandomness = 0.4 (from 0.5), reload time = 1.5 sec (instead of 1.6)
- Railgun Carrier : projectile dieing too soon is fixed ; projectiles are faster ; projectile HP increased to 165 (from 150). It will be able to "eat" more torpedoes, especially Sera Destroyer torpedoes, but not stronger against Seraphim t3 subs.
- New T2 Destroyer: texture is broken due to model change. If the new weapons are functional enough and kept, texture will be fixed for the new model.
HP = 6500 (from 6700) ;
Fire cannons : damages over time reduced to 120 (from 150) (10*12 over 2 seconds)= Full DPS against static targets = 300 (from 330).
New depth charge weapon (World War 2 style) : 5 split projectiles, range = 45, damages = 150, AOE = 3, rate of fire = 0.3, full DPS = 225 (all charges will not hit the same target, only 2 bombs at most, so real DPS = 0-90 but can hit several targets), it works differently from torpedoes which never miss but can be countered by anti-torpedoes. These depth charges can miss but not be countered by anti-torps. Works well in bombard mode (little bit similar to a mine field).
mini railgun for anti-torpedoes, shoot at torpedoes every 1.3 seconds

- Heavy Destroyer : Stingray Weapon DPS = 66 (from 60), railgun projectile is faster

Air:
- T2 Gunship: Stingray anti ground DPS = 66 (from 60)

Land:
- ACU: speed upgrade = 720 mass (from 650), 28800 energy (from 14400), buildtime = 900 (from 600).

- T3 Mobile arty : Mass cost = 950 (from 960); Buildtime = 5000 (from 4800), damages = 620 (from 600), DPS = 82 (from 80),veterancy = 10 (from 9).
- Nova : 266 DPS (from 200), speed = 3.75 (from 3.7), veterancy = 10/20/30/40/50 (from 12/24, etc)
- Slugger : 7000 HP (from 7200), speed = 2.3 (from 2.2), muzzle velocity = 45 (from 35), turret turn speed increased to 70 (from 60)

- Beamer : Mass cost = 12500 (from 12000), Range = 38 (from 35), AOE = 1 (from 0.5), speed = 2 (from 2.7).
- Crawler : long range Tac missile : range increased to 175 (from 150); EMP radius = 4 (from 3). Radar range = 150 (same as Bombard mode range so that it's easy to see the range of bombard mode), homing missile range ring turned to red to make it visible compared to long range tac missile.

SCU changes:
SCU RAS : cost = 1800 mass (from 800), buildtime = 7200 (from 3600), energy cost = 60000 (from 45000) mass output = +4 (from +2), energy output = +500 (from +300). Don't forget you benefit from adjacency bonus and that you get the mass and energy sooner than for other SCU. It's easier to just spam Nomads to increase resources than for others to make RAS farms, so resource generator is less efficient.

SCU Rocket = better aiming : all rockets fired at once so that they don't shoot all over the place when SCU is turning.
rate of fire = 0.285 (from 0.3). Damage = 175 (from 150) DPS = 400 (from 360), DPS in capacitor = 685 (from 600) but over 4 seconds instead of 3 seconds.
pip
Supreme Commander
 
Posts: 1825
Joined: 04 Oct 2011, 15:33
Has liked: 191 times
Been liked: 86 times
FAF User Name: pip

Re: Build 53 balance changelog

Postby Apofenas » 10 Dec 2014, 13:16

What about t3 mass fabs giving unfair amount of resources?

I don't know what to think about destroyer change. In targets are unmicroed, destroyer gets super effective against any kind of naval units. If units are microed, than new weapon doesn't kill at all. Also noticed some projectile under water, doing something weird.
When we had ZeP's ladder system I played more 1v1s on only Winter duel, than I play actual games in current trash they call ladder. Makes me so sad.
Apofenas
Evaluator
 
Posts: 656
Joined: 21 Jul 2013, 14:39
Has liked: 137 times
Been liked: 137 times
FAF User Name: Apofenas

Re: Build 53 balance changelog

Postby pip » 10 Dec 2014, 13:32

T3 mass fabs were fixed too.

Yes, the weapon is strong only against unmicroed group of units, and weak against microed units, it's like t1 mobile artilleries. The depth charges explode under water (white and red spherical fx), that's what they are supposed to do. If subs are microed, and chase the destro, it's best to use bombard mode so that some bombs will damage the subs, because they take some time to explode (only when they reach a certain depth).

The stats of the weapon can be adjusted (more spread / less spread, more damage / less damage, more AOE / less AOE, etc).
pip
Supreme Commander
 
Posts: 1825
Joined: 04 Oct 2011, 15:33
Has liked: 191 times
Been liked: 86 times
FAF User Name: pip

Re: Build 53 balance changelog

Postby Ithilis_Quo » 10 Dec 2014, 17:08

Positive:
-Slugger/ Mauler shot animation is really good, better as was before.
-T2 gunship 10% buff help to be on cca same level as another gunship to price dmg.
-Nova dps rise was in must be to be comporable. you can now remove shot reaload time indicator when rof is so short

Negative:
-Beemer speed 2 is too slow. ML/GC have 2,5 but ML have stealt, that give him some time to suprise. beamer dotn have hp, range stealth and dmg. You probably do it for dont overrange percivals and brick, but beamer cant fire when is going back, and cant go forward as megalith can. +3 bigger range as perci dont allow him outrange in any way.
Beemer need more move as GC. When that units is so week then need be at least mobile. Beamer need something to be build.

Big confusion:
-destroyer
I dont understand you Pip. Plne is to make nomad integrate in game, for people acept them as standard fraction as acept serafin. We have a discusion about T2 navy what is master hard to simply understand what are think working, make a solution for stay in your - nomad- design and you make something what is complethly different, and what is much more confusing as was before. what would people see is "what the hell is this ship doing" its completly new mechanism on fraction what is so hard completly new. you probably never want them to be integrate otherwise dont understand why make this kind of fix. Try look on nomads from newcomer perspective, what would he see? What would he think, what decision he would make, what is consequence.

this destroer is sooooooooooo hard OP, its unbevievebla and realy hard to believe that you do something like that.
I test 5 nomad destro vs 5 sera sunk destro and lose only one nomad, it was absoluthli whitotu micro, but sera have no chance. Against subs its superior effective. Awfull. Man this is maddnes :D didi you ever test it?
Instead of easy simple and consensual solution give 40dps with railway canon to destoyrer and take same number from main canon you make huge mount of work with reworking whole ship.

I dont see any option how only change stats of weapon can help here.
Why you simply dont take torpedo defense and torpedo to railgun carrier and 40 dps railgun to destroer. It fix problem, and not create new huge one....

Its incredible hard to balance this. And its absoluthly pointless make this problem!!

When it would be on UEF style: strong destroer but low anti subs, and strong torpedo boat, stronger and more expensive as uef and EMP cruiser for lack of shield. It would be easy to understand, easy to accept.
If im sometime blind with my suggestion what is miss a point(what im), then this is black hole. Please, remove it. :(
______________________

Would you integrate artilery suport toggle and move it from gunship to scout? /viewtopic.php?f=16&t=8692&p=83611#p83611
"Fixed in Equilibrium" Washy
User avatar
Ithilis_Quo
Supreme Commander
 
Posts: 1314
Joined: 29 Dec 2012, 15:55
Location: Slovakia
Has liked: 371 times
Been liked: 171 times
FAF User Name: Ithilis

Re: Build 53 balance changelog

Postby pip » 10 Dec 2014, 17:55

Destroyer idea is not mine, it's Brute's idea. It's a proof of concept, it's not yet balanced. It is too strong for now because the projectile was supposed to split higher (like UEF artillery), but due to technical problems (weapon not firing properly), the firing arc had to be changed and split occurs just above water instead of higher, and now the bombs are too close to one another, meaning it can hit the same unit more than it was intended. But it can be changed later with other adjustments.

You should redo your tests and move the other units, like a real person would do and see if it's so OP. If you don't move your subs, it will rape them for sure, but if you move your subs, they will not be hit at all, so don't say it's op, otherwise, t1 artilleries are completely op: they kill a ACU that doesn't move in 30 seconds. But if acu moves, he will take almost no damage and kill all artilleries. This mechanic already exists in the game, it's not hard to understand at all. It's exactly the same as a UEF t1 artillery, but against underwater units.

This weapon can be adjusted (spread, AOE, damage) to be less efficient against single targets (that was the idea, to weaken underwater units in an area compared to railgun carrier : very precise and good against single subs). I think it's an interesting weapon, and I don't mind that Brute's idea is different.

The real question is : if this weapon gets balanced well enough, can it be a nice addition, or is it not worth working on it anymore and it should be changed to something basic like a weak torpedo tube.

Beamer can shoot when retreating, you should test it again : attack a group of percival and retreat and see how it will hit percivals trying to catch it. That's why its speed has been reduced because of longer range and ability to shoot backwards like Fatboy. And if it's too fast, a Monkeylord will never be able to kill it because of longer range of the Beamer, so you will be able to counter a 19k mass unit with a 12500 k mass unit. Also, as it very easily outranges ACU with gun upgrade now, it's not easy to overcharge Beamer with ACU as it was before. If it's too fast, it becomes too hard to counter at t3 without anything but another experimental.
pip
Supreme Commander
 
Posts: 1825
Joined: 04 Oct 2011, 15:33
Has liked: 191 times
Been liked: 86 times
FAF User Name: pip

Re: Build 53 balance changelog

Postby Ithilis_Quo » 10 Dec 2014, 18:19

Already have no time for test it again,I wil test it at evning or tomorow and take a feedback again
___________________________________________________

This change make me sick. Its like UEF artilery, but its on completly different units, Its same as take T3 artilery range and take it on air plane. Yes it is in game but absoluthly not on this way.

Here is a short list of differences betwen nomads and standard of other fraction, (other fraction have differences from "standard too but) you realy think that they must have so many completly different thinks?

T1
- Acu have compeltle different mechanism
- T1 sniper tank compeltly different
- t1 AA/arty -compeltly different
- T1 tank hoover - different
- T1 lab with hover - btw this unit have some time very veird move, via hoover its nearly imposible micro against tanks for go out of him range and run to mom(acu) for help
T1 bomber - different bombing and reaload
T1 gunship different
T1 transport different
T1 radar different

T2
Brute tank different price category
MML completly different
field enginer is different
flak is different
lack of mobile shield/stealth is cmpeltly different
T2 gunship completly different
destreor compeltly different
cruiser compeltly different
railgun carrier different
T2 radar is different
statick shield/stealt is different
artilery suport - completly different
bombard mode is compeltly different

T3
Sluger - different price category
T3 artilery - different
nova - different
T3 mobile AA - different
T3 bomber different
t3 navy lack of batleship - different
T3 subs completly different
lack of nuke on navy different
T3 (cheaper) artilery completly different
T3 (expensive) artilery different
Sacus completly different.
omni is different


The mount of total different stuf make nomads very hostile for newcomer, and after re-playing we have nearly only newcomer because old palyers dont go back!
Last edited by Ithilis_Quo on 11 Dec 2014, 17:48, edited 1 time in total.
"Fixed in Equilibrium" Washy
User avatar
Ithilis_Quo
Supreme Commander
 
Posts: 1314
Joined: 29 Dec 2012, 15:55
Location: Slovakia
Has liked: 371 times
Been liked: 171 times
FAF User Name: Ithilis

Re: Build 53 balance changelog

Postby Apofenas » 11 Dec 2014, 09:03

The nomads have same game play as other factions almost everywhere. Units just have a little faction diversity. So i desagree with Ithilis at this point.

Though the destroyer is an exeption. The new concept is a awesome looking idea, but terrible balance solution That is gonna be impossible to balance just because the destroyer is 2d most built unit in navy, but affects all naval units. With micro the new destroyer is super ineffective and doesn't hit anything, without micro it's super effective and and kills anything. So i still think the way we suggested is far better, just because it's more common, working and easier to balance.
When we had ZeP's ladder system I played more 1v1s on only Winter duel, than I play actual games in current trash they call ladder. Makes me so sad.
Apofenas
Evaluator
 
Posts: 656
Joined: 21 Jul 2013, 14:39
Has liked: 137 times
Been liked: 137 times
FAF User Name: Apofenas

Re: Build 53 balance changelog

Postby pip » 11 Dec 2014, 09:35

It is OP now because at longest range, all bombs hit the same target (especially when it's big). The initial intention is that no more than 2 bombs hit the same target, but that you can hit a lot of targets = deal small damage to 4 units, rather than big damage to one unit (right now, it deals 2 or 3 times more damages than intended to single big targets than it should, because of projectile elevation split).

The concept is that it's supposed to be poorly effective against a single target, because it can dodge all bombs by just moving, but effective against multiple targets, because with the spread, you will hit some units that were near the intended target (and several units can be hit with a single bomb). It has to be tested in real game conditions, a real competitive game, with both player microing a whole fleet, with subs, frigates, Destroyers, railgun carriers, etc and not one on one unit fight. You will only get the way the weapon is intended against a real player who will try to dodge but will not be able to dodge everything because of wide spread and multiple units, and sometimes just forgetting to move.
As I said, it's the same behaviour as t1 arties, and no one says t1 arties are op or up just because they don't do damage against moving units / too much against non moving units.

Currently, the spread is too small at long range, and the proper width at close range, but it's enough to get the feeling of how the general concept works. Especially with big subs fleet, enabling bombard mode will shoot lot of bombs making it difficult for subs to not be hit, and this is a good defense, like a temporary mine field, so that enemy subs have to move back, and then railgun carriers can shoot them from far away.

To sum up : get some real naval games going so we can judge how it works based on true gameplay. It will help me to figure if the concept can work if fine tuned, or is too difficult to get right. I need real gameplay to judge that, my own tests are not enough.
pip
Supreme Commander
 
Posts: 1825
Joined: 04 Oct 2011, 15:33
Has liked: 191 times
Been liked: 86 times
FAF User Name: pip

Re: Build 53 balance changelog

Postby Ithilis_Quo » 11 Dec 2014, 17:39

It is as artilery, but when you lose unmicroed T1 tanks its not so big pain as when you lose unmicroed destroer, arilery dont kill 50 T1 tanks for small inattention. this destoyer can. + artilery destroy nearly all mass wreck, this destroer not and mostly give it to you. especialy on start of game, it can change game very radicali. It is again very edge sharp. What was main problem with previous destroyer who was in critical danger against subs. already this very sharp edge go on enemy, who are in critical danger against nomad destroer when dont micro. And this situation with this mechanism stay in game. Any change stats dont help here. Have shapr edge is bad for gameplay, because small mistake can easy radicaly change a game whitout chance to go back. Lose first T2 navy and give all mass to enemy is big pain.

What we can take from this solution is idea of water mine field. It can be interesting, (and it can be crazy solution, take it as brainstorming)

1. change destroer and railgun carrier to previous suggestion.
2 .move this new canon to battleship. -> will be as function instead of lack of naval nuke
3. give that units build power, and allow them build mine as is buildet TML. Each mine set cost some mass and energy for build. Max X number on battleship before deploy
3,5. reload time for fire mine about 5sec
3,6. mine would have reload time when start be wepon active. about 5sec. 3,5+3,6 for dont allow insta stun enemy ship in battle.
4. allow them deploy mine field what will do this new canon. mine will exist as suicide units whitotu posibility to move.
5. this mine would stay underwater, with stealth (need omny), witheout posibility to move, with few hp (destroed by 1aoe shots, and with some range and autodestruck when enemy come to range. And with not drastic dmg, but EMP after explosion.
6. feel free and have good feeling from change all rivers and bashin to mine field :D and bash oponents when jump on mines


It is posible sharp edge, but less because cost mass and time for build. And because its on t3. It is different game mechanism. What im normaly against to give newone. But on T3 where is bigger differences cross fraction. And you idea would in some way exist, can fill empty place on navy atom, and T2 navy would be better balanced.

Seriously, i have no mods to test new destroer function. Im principialy against, and see it as big problem maker what is pointless. Especialy when we have done discuse in past about how to make it well. Im terified of situation that it will exist on destroer on this principe. Because it mean that nomad naval would be again 4 mouth rebalancing. And integration would never be done. This destroyer mechanism is inbalance as hell, and cant found a solution how dont make this mechanism ussles and balance it witheout make sharpe edges.
"Fixed in Equilibrium" Washy
User avatar
Ithilis_Quo
Supreme Commander
 
Posts: 1314
Joined: 29 Dec 2012, 15:55
Location: Slovakia
Has liked: 371 times
Been liked: 171 times
FAF User Name: Ithilis

Re: Build 53 balance changelog

Postby Ithilis_Quo » 11 Dec 2014, 22:12

I test beamer,

Pip you have my apologise.

I was wrong.
It fire backward what i was think it fire only on front, dont know why make this mistake.
And more important, outrange percivals is op. It cant have this range.
I was think that orginal range was 30 not 35. Maximum range what beamer can have with backward fire ability is 35 otherwise brick and perci are ussles and it break balance. Im sorry for be rude for this on previous balance chanelog :(.

Can you take it back to 35 range and speed to 2,7 as before ?

It is problematic, definitly it cant outrange percival/birck, because thay dont have sniper bots. then is problem with other experimetnal, for dont be outrange with experimental whiteout posibility to fire and deal at least some dmg.
In finnal it must be faster to be posible to strike on experimental. Again sorry :cry:
_____________

ACU upgrade.

Speed
small tweak change power cost from 28800 -> 24000 (same as gun) and buildtime from 900->800 same as gun = -9m -300e/sec
That number looks better, -320 is veird :D

Rapid repair
In description is now not writed that this upgrade give 3500 HP, this information i see as very important.

rocket sacu
I low that effect of new missile. Looks perfect, and work much more better, thanks brute51.
"Fixed in Equilibrium" Washy
User avatar
Ithilis_Quo
Supreme Commander
 
Posts: 1314
Joined: 29 Dec 2012, 15:55
Location: Slovakia
Has liked: 371 times
Been liked: 171 times
FAF User Name: Ithilis

Next

Return to Nomads Balance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest