96 replies to this topic

[idolische]

Sylhiri, It's not about "lighter weapons for lighter mechs". It's about: "different weapons for different classes to facilitate balancing". If A-class happens to have problems with regular say Hellfires - give him another version it would be good with - and so on.

No one wants to give mechs ridiculous weapon sets which make them powerhouses (Grenadier, Scout).

RedVan, Grenadier IS an extreme case. Push something to extreme and it shifts to another side of imbalance. Your arguments about number of advantages and drawbacks are not correct as these are not boolean one/zero values. You can be MUCH faster and slightly less durable, for example. The combination of all qualities with different weights produces the total efficiency. To make many viable and different gamestyles you need to have a lot variable balancing parameters and lack of these leads to low variability and prevalence of few OP combinations.

[RedVan]

dEd101, on February 03 2013 - 11:14 AM, said:

Oh for goodness sake the Grenadier is considered OP mainly because of stunlock. A good pilot can pin you down so you can't move and just shoot away until you are dead. Take the stunlock away and all you have is a gun that can be fired too much in relation to it's damage.

Actually, no, rev-gl is not considered OP simply because of its stunlock.  High ROF with essentially no heat buildup is also considered OP.  There has been many threads on this.

Quote

Now about the hitbox, regardless of what the better players are capable of doing, the newbies are getting owned because of the learning curve. Pit a newbie against a C class and it's target practice, but pit them against a much faster A class and they become mincemeat.

No matter how you change anything, the higher skilled players are going to annihilate noobs.  That is standard in every game known to man kind.

What you are proposing would actually make things worse for noobs.  Giving C class higher damage weapons means a skilled player with a C class will be able to wreck noobs faster, but the noobs aren't going to have any easier time against the C class, despite their low maneuverability and hitbox size, because they're new to the game.  So all they're going to witness is good players with OP weapons destroying everything.

Quote

A game like this thrives on newbies getting hooked and paying money. If this game only caters for the extremely competitive players no newbies will join and no money will come in then the game will close down.

Balance must be done based on the upper skill level.  If they make things easier for noobs by increasing the damage they can do, a skilled player is going to take it over the top.

Quote

So far I have yet to see any skilled players (besides RedVan) say that hitting an A class is the same as hitting a C class.

Obviously it isn't exactly the same, but once you become skilled, you won't have a problem hitting A class.  No problem hitting A class and no problem hitting C class = pretty much the same.

So lets put the suggestion in play here:  C class get higher damage weapons.  Skilled player that doesn't have a problem hitting A class now has a high powered weapon, and high armor, what do you think is going to happen to a noob in any class, vs a skilled player with high damage and high armor_

Doesn't it make more sense to only have a speed/armor tradeoff_  That way skilled players don't have a huge advantage of high armor, high damage, their only advantage is high armor.

Quote

The maneuverability of the A class also gives it an advantage in that it can disengage when it wants and repair.

This is entirely situational, so its really not worth discussing.

idolische, on February 03 2013 - 11:48 AM, said:

No one wants to give mechs ridiculous weapon sets which make them powerhouses (Grenadier, Scout).

RedVan, Grenadier IS an extreme case. Push something to extreme and it shifts to another side of imbalance. Your arguments about number of advantages and drawbacks are not correct as these are not boolean one/zero values. You can be MUCH faster and slightly less durable, for example. The combination of all qualities with different weights produces the total efficiency. To make many viable and different gamestyles you need to have a lot variable balancing parameters and lack of these leads to low variability and prevalence of few OP combinations.

If grenadier is an extreme case, then how about brawler_  It's considered fairly well balanced.  Take a look at a flak brawler vs a flak scout.  Every time the scout pops around to hit the brawler, the brawler can hit them back, but the brawler has more armor, thus will survive.  If scout runs away to heal, well, the brawler can heal sitting right there, so they can start healing sooner, and be healed before the scout gets back to reengage.

Based on these stats, a flak + TOW hit combo deals 305 damage.  Scout has what, 500 armor_  So one combo from a brawler and the scout is half dead.  Brawler has what, 800 ish armor_  Cant remember exactly, but it's up there somewhere.  So the brawler loses less than half its armor from a single combo from the scout.  This is the way it should work.  C class has more armor, so it can take more hits, but it cant go running around all over the place.  A class has less armor, so it cant take as many hits, but it can go running around all over the place.

Now look at game modes in hawken.  Siege and MA both have hard set objective points.  You don't need to go running all over the place, because you need to be on the objective (or close to it).  Even in TDM, if playing with a good team, you're not running all over the map killing fuzzy bunny, you're sticking together and moving as a team from cover to cover.  That is something C class is very good at.

What are you proposing_  Light flak and light TOW for scout because it has more maneuverability.  Ok, so now the scout can do even less damage to the brawler every time it engages the brawler.  But the brawler is still chunking half the scouts armor soon as its seen.

Now lets put a noob into a scout and tell them to take on a brawler.  Hah!  Yeah right!  They'll run off crying OP after the first shot!

Put that noob in the brawler now.  Noob cant aim yet, so a skilled scout is still going to win.  Noob will probably make stupid mistakes like walking out of cover because "I haz lots of armor" and obviously get wrecked.  So, giving them higher powered weapons isn't helping them any.  But it sure as hell is making it an ez mode for skilled players!

That is why you need to balance based on high skilled players.  And giving a high skilled player 2 advantages (high armor, high damage) vs 1 advantage (high speed) is a big no no.

Edited by RedVan, February 03 2013 - 12:10 PM.

[Sylhiri]

dEd101, on February 03 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

So that makes

A class: 63

B class: 38

C class: 28

You really need to watch the tourny videos. One of the teams that ran a majority of A classes just got destroyed. The best teams is 2 B, 2 C and 1 A. I think at one point the winning team had 3 B's and 2 C's_

Edited by Sylhiri, February 03 2013 - 11:52 AM.

[Gree]

+1

[idolische]

RedVan, another wall of Black/White boolean maximalist One/Zero text. "No problem hitting" is not 100% hitting with 100% damage. Statistically, which is most important balance wise it would be "making 60% damage per shot to C-class average and 40% damage per shot to A-class". Figures. Collect statistics, tweak numbers. Not take OP weapon from this and give it to this.

[Sylhiri]

Giving all classes their own weapon versions would indicate a massive amount of balancing. But i'm interested in what you would think of doing to the Heat Cannon, Assault Rifle and Flak per class.

[RedVan]

idolische, on February 03 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

RedVan, another wall of Black/White boolean maximalist One/Zero text. "No problem hitting" is not 100% hitting with 100% damage. Statistically, which is most important balance wise it would be "making 60% damage per shot to C-class average and 40% damage per shot to A-class". Figures. Collect statistics, tweak numbers. Not take OP weapon from this and give it to this.

I base what I say on what happens in game.  You can drool over stats all day long, but that doesn't mean fuzzy bunny until you see how it plays in game.

And I'd be willing to bet I've played a fuzzy bunny ton more than you.

Edited by RedVan, February 03 2013 - 12:20 PM.

[dEd101]

Sylhiri, on February 03 2013 - 11:51 AM, said:

You really need to watch the tourny videos. One of the teams that ran a majority of A classes just got destroyed. The best teams is 2 B, 2 C and 1 A. I think at one point the winning team had 3 B's and 2 C's_

Will do.

[Sylhiri]

RedVan, on February 03 2013 - 12:19 PM, said:

I base what I say on what happens in game.  You can drool over stats all day long, but that doesn't mean fuzzy bunny until you see how it plays in game.

And I'd be willing to bet I've played a fuzzy bunny ton more than you.

/summon AsianJoyKiller

dEd101, on February 03 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

Will do.

Might take a bit, it's like 5-6 hours long.

Edited by Sylhiri, February 03 2013 - 12:28 PM.

[nihilistic_killer]

RedVan, on February 03 2013 - 12:19 PM, said:

idolische, on February 03 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

RedVan, another wall of Black/White boolean maximalist One/Zero text. "No problem hitting" is not 100% hitting with 100% damage. Statistically, which is most important balance wise it would be "making 60% damage per shot to C-class average and 40% damage per shot to A-class". Figures. Collect statistics, tweak numbers. Not take OP weapon from this and give it to this.

I base what I say on what happens in game.  You can drool over stats all day long, but that doesn't mean fuzzy bunny until you see how it plays in game.

And I'd be willing to bet I've played a fuzzy bunny ton more than you.

Hey RedVan, would it make C class overpowered if their weapons got an across-the-board buff of 0.01%_ What about 0.001%_ No_ Ok, so even if you don't think it's a good idea, don't you think there is a point at which C-class weapons could be made stronger without wrecking game balance_ If so, roughly what would that look like_ I made an earlier post proposing about 7.5 - 10% differences in stats like damage and reload time, and 15-20% differences in heat generation and projectile speed, just as a general starting point for discussion.

I'm curious, if we were to make this discussion as crude as damage percentage (and I don't want to, I want lots of weapon variation), what is the smallest possible number that you think C-class weapons could be increased by without making them OP_

[RedVan]

nihilistic_killer, on February 03 2013 - 04:11 PM, said:

RedVan, on February 03 2013 - 12:19 PM, said:

idolische, on February 03 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

RedVan, another wall of Black/White boolean maximalist One/Zero text. "No problem hitting" is not 100% hitting with 100% damage. Statistically, which is most important balance wise it would be "making 60% damage per shot to C-class average and 40% damage per shot to A-class". Figures. Collect statistics, tweak numbers. Not take OP weapon from this and give it to this.

I base what I say on what happens in game.  You can drool over stats all day long, but that doesn't mean fuzzy bunny until you see how it plays in game.

And I'd be willing to bet I've played a fuzzy bunny ton more than you.

Hey RedVan, would it make C class overpowered if their weapons got an across-the-board buff of 0.01%_ What about 0.001%_ No_ Ok, so even if you don't think it's a good idea, don't you think there is a point at which C-class weapons could be made stronger without wrecking game balance_ If so, roughly what would that look like_ I made an earlier post proposing about 7.5 - 10% differences in stats like damage and reload time, and 15-20% differences in heat generation and projectile speed, just as a general starting point for discussion.

I'm curious, if we were to make this discussion as crude as damage percentage (and I don't want to, I want lots of weapon variation), what is the smallest possible number that you think C-class weapons could be increased by without making them OP_

1st there's no point. I've already shown the problem you're trying to solve isn't even a real problem

2nd:  if you're talking about such small increases, what's the point in doing it at all_  Do you think a few % is going to make a difference_  We've already seen how minimal a difference there is between level 1 and level 25 mechs.... There's no point in giving them a dmg buff if it isn't going to be substantial.

How about we just let them work out the balance issues with the current method, then let players get good with what has already been working.

I really see no point in giving skilled players an even bigger benefit by allowing them to do more damage than they already can with C class

[Sylhiri]

Fix turret mode first and balance around that.

[rizzator]

+1

[dEd101]

Having played c class a lot and experimented  with explosive weapons I've come to the conclusion that explosive splash damage should be reduced to 0 right at the edge of the blast (right now its something like 40-50%) and all stunlock removed. once that is done and a perception of imba still exists other solutions (like the one I originally suggested in this thread) could be addressed again.

[Adler]

With the direction these suggestions are going, I'll follow up on them, but with the "If it loses effectiveness, why would you do it_" mindset that whoever makes these mechs probably has, and with the guess that additional armor is the exclusive reason for a heavier mech

Chances are, whoever assembles the mechs sells the rights to make the individual parts or weapons, and while the schematics are ultimately followed, they may not be followed as well as whoever puts the final product together may have wanted. Due to corporate greed, however, they are accepted & rushed out.

I'd add a small, randomized chance (Within certain parameters) that, as you enter a game, you will find your weapon somewhat lacking in a specific functionality (e.g Heat rate, firepower, accuracy, etc.) for the duration of the game, attributable to shoddy manufacturing or crappy integration of the weapon, or both.

This should only affect A-class mechs with a limited list of weapons, because the B-class would usually be used as the control (Hence being a "Medium") and the C-class is really just an arguable improvement on a B-class, sacrificing speed for armor.

TL;DR - When you enter a game, the game decides if your weapon suffers a penalty (Or penalties) to its stat(s). This penalty should last for the entire match & only affect a short list of A-class mech weapons, and not exceed a combination of at least 10% of the weapon's total functionality. This is due to problems with integration or construction of the weapon on a non-standard platform.

Edited by Adler, February 08 2013 - 05:52 AM.

[RedVan]

Adler, on February 08 2013 - 05:48 AM, said:

With the direction these suggestions are going, I'll follow up on them, but with the "If it loses effectiveness, why would you do it_" mindset that whoever makes these mechs probably has, and with the guess that additional armor is the exclusive reason for a heavier mech

Chances are, whoever assembles the mechs sells the rights to make the individual parts or weapons, and while the schematics are ultimately followed, they may not be followed as well as whoever puts the final product together may have wanted. Due to corporate greed, however, they are accepted & rushed out.

I'd add a small, randomized chance (Within certain parameters) that, as you enter a game, you will find your weapon somewhat lacking in a specific functionality (e.g Heat rate, firepower, accuracy, etc.) for the duration of the game, attributable to shoddy manufacturing or crappy integration of the weapon, or both.

This should only affect A-class mechs with a limited list of weapons, because the B-class would usually be used as the control (Hence being a "Medium") and the C-class is really just an arguable improvement on a B-class, sacrificing speed for armor.

TL;DR - When you enter a game, the game decides if your weapon suffers a penalty (Or penalties) to its stat(s). This penalty should last for the entire match & only affect a short list of A-class mech weapons, and not exceed a combination of at least 10% of the weapon's total functionality. This is due to problems with integration or construction of the weapon on a non-standard platform.

Add a dice roll to a skill based game_  Hell to the no

[Lophir]

This isn't dnd, no one wants random rolls.