Author Topic: My thoughts on current balance  (Read 17266 times)

Offline Lancefighter

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,440
My thoughts on current balance
« on: August 28, 2012, 11:06:14 pm »
I believe at some point, I stopped playing Aiwar, a while back. If I remember, this was actually really close to the release of the spire expansion. Since then, it seems that quite a bit has changed.

Today, I spent about 5 hours in a game with Chemical Art, where I was plodding around as a normal player, and he as a champion.

The map was a pretty simple seeming clusters map, against two difficulty 8 ai, random moderate. Rolled a starship commander and a vicious raider, and random plot things. Not sure as to all the random plots, but weve encountered the dyson, the devourer golem, both human marauders and human resistance fighters (albeit briefly).
Since I absolutely hate myself, I turn on silly things like crossplanet waves and no wave warnings, but thats normal for me.
I also opted to let random choose my starting ship, and rolled a beautiful shield bearer.

Not going to deep into aar-stuff, the game went reasonably well, with a few .. A little bit back and forth, where I seemed incredibly unprepared for 2k cruisers...

Back to the point: I have a few points of discussion I would like to open a discussion on.

Foremost - Starships actually feel really weak right now. There is a single line of useful starships - The zenith starships (marked "alien starship" on the map search, fix plz?). They perform really well as dps powerhouses. They also survive reasonably well, with minor exceptions (I'm LOOKING AT YOU CRUISERS). Problem is - They are the only useful starship it seems.
Fleet starships have always been about munitions boosting, which is perfectly fine. They were designed to spearhead a fleet, and provide bonuses for doing so. However, there are still a lot of things wrong with them. They deal absolutely pathetic damage.. I mean, Its not pathetic pathetic, but its not particularly good. They used to be decent at destroying things, mainly cruisers, but now they just seem to lack damage to do anything useful. Problem with lacking damage, is that they dont make up for it in raw health either - If I'm not mistaken, zenith starships are their betters in virtually every category outside of fleet boosting. Finally - Fleet starships are STILL heavy. Youknow what has bonuses towards heavy? Bombers. Dont get me wrong - bombers are a perfectly fine counter to starships. The problem is just one thing - They have the same heavy bonus as they do ultra-heavy. It just doesnt fit. Ultraheavy things on average have an order of magnitude more raw hp than heavy things.. Yet they still get the same bonus.

(btw, minor bug with fleet starships - They dont fall into the same planetary overview group like they are supposed to)

Slightly unrelated, but did I mention cruisers? Did they get a substantial buff recently? I feel like they are actually really strong right now.

Back to starships - I actually dont really think bomber or dreadnaughts are particularly flawed. I think they still fill the role they are supposed to fill really well, and as an alternative to bombers, they seem to be good. I saw the enclave buffs, and those seem really nice. Unfortunately I havent given them the attention they deserve yet.

On the other hand, I have great issue with spire starships. At one point, the great and powerful Spire Starship, (May we never forget..) was actually a long range shell spewer, dealing massive amounts of damage to many targets on the battlefield. It also provided munitions boosting, but that is another story, and frankly I think splitting the roles is ok.
The problem at the moment is that it doesnt deal damage. The spire beam mechanic.. is.. well, Flawed. It is ok as long as two things are true - Both parties are stationary AND the receiving party has lots of health. In some cases (forcefields) the first is not as important, but it is still very relevant. The problem here is that this is space - It is very unlikely that both parties will be stationary. I dont feel like the spire beam weapon deals its damage consistently enough.
There was at one point an implementation of the spire beam that I really liked - Way back in beta, when it was first introduced. It felt really nice, and actually dealt damage to a wide area of ships. For some reason, since then I've been unable to reproduce this particularly well..
So the spire starship, which was once the flag of your fleet, the almost literal point of the spear.. Is now pretty much useless, as far as dealing damage to fleets goes. I mean, its decent if, as i said earlier, both of you are stationary and the target has lots of hp.. But lets be realistic here - That plainly doesnt happen as often as it needs to for the spire beam weapon to be relevant. Also, can they even hit cruisers? I feel like cruisers might be a tad strong almost purely because the starship that did well against them previously, the spire starship, is now useless.

Then finally, we have absolutely HUGE knowledge costs for mk3 starships. These seem incredibly unjustified, honestly. I could justify 5 and 7 thousand for zenith and spire starships previously, but that was because they were incredibly strong in their own right. They brought a lot to the table. At the moment, I cant honestly see why anyone would even UNLOCK spire starships.. let alone pay the exorbidant amount of resources it takes to build them. Looking at bomber starships - its what, 6k knowledge for mk3 bomber starships.. Plus 300k metal PER SHIP. I feel like that scaling is a little bit high..
you get similar numbers when you look at all of the starships - i can maybe justify zenith starships because of how strong they are.. MAYBE. The rest? Definitely not. Almost all of them follow this trend of being incredibly expensive.. prohibitively so.

--

So; We have established what I believe to be a problem - I feel like fleet starships are not up to par, and I feel spire starships dont fill their role. But what exactly do we change?

I am not really sure with regard to the Fleet starship. I mentioned earlier that they feel really light - they cant really stand up in battle particularly well, partially because I feel heavy is a very bad hull type. I think if we looked at the bonuses against heavy, itd go a long way. Additionally, I feel like I want to differentiation them from the munitions booster fleet unit. I was thinking that they might also provide an armor buff to ships around them? That feels like something that might go a really long way with a lot of ships, but not quite as far with others. I think synergisticly with other starships itd be amazing, but certain fleet ships wouldnt benefit at all. Is it currently possible to give a flat armor buff maybe? For instance it could give a bonus 100 armor, then provide armor boosting 2x?
This isnt to say that they should armor boost instead of munitions boost - I think they maybe could do both - to a point. A pure munitions booster or armor booster would be best, but these give you both, which seems like a worthy idea to consider at least.

On spire starships though - I feel again its mainly a byproduct of their weapon feeling very lackluster. The zenith beam, for example, is amazing. Like. Seriously seems to work really well. What does the zenith beam do differently? It uses single pulse of damage. I *think* the hbc does the same thing  (deal damage very quickly in a line), with the caveat that the hbc never deals more than x damage, where the zenith beam frigate deals damage to all units in a line.
I believe the hbc mechanic is far more streamlined, and more importantly, consistent - Why did you opt to make a new mechanic that doesnt seem to work as well? I think it honestly needs to be looked at before spire starships become relevant at all.

I think if we made the fleet starships more useful as flagships, and the spire starships more useful at dealing damage properly, we could make the entire group of starships a lot stronger as a whole.

Also, when did 8/8 waves ramp up so quickly? Nearly died to an invasion of 4 thousand mk2 units..
Ideas? Suggestions? Concerns? Bugs to be squashed? Report them on the Mantis Bugtracker!

Author of the Dyson Project and the Spire Gambit

Offline chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: My thoughts on current balance
« Reply #1 on: August 28, 2012, 11:24:16 pm »
To echo some of things I noticed with Lancefighter...

First lancefighter, it was confusing at first but mentally I got used to it in game quickly, but to clarify for everyone else by "cruisers" you mean missile frigates. Wouldn't care if I wasn't the son of a sailor.

Right now there is no starship that has a boost to artillery. None. I was surprised to see this but it is true. Right now of the combat starships 3 are weak to bombers 3 are weak to frigates  and 1 weak to fighters. That is fine. What's not so fine is watching frigates shred your fleet and not having your own starships have any counter to them (I'm thinking the flagship line would be bested suited to this, unless we finally start giving bomber starships some bonuses.) Heck, take away the flagships close combat bonus and replace it with artillery since the zenith one is more suited to it both due to its rapid rate of fire and because it has the bonus already as well.

Next, the spire ship is currently weak. It on paper has 20% more base dps then the zenith or flagship line. However, there are several problems:

1) The spire ship almost never delivers its full payload. It is lucky to get half the payload off because it takes so long.
2) The spire ship gets no bonuses, while the others get 4x bonuses over a variety of things.
3) The other ships have multi-shot guns to prevent overkill, while the spire ship has again the very situational super long beam
4) I need independent verification, but it seems the reload process doesn't feel like it starts till the beam ends. Which means the beam fires over 3 - 5 seconds then and only then starts the reload process. Which means it doesn't dish out 240k damage over 8 seconds, its 240k over 11 - 13 seconds, which alone would make it worst then the other starships in every way IF this is actually a fact which I cannot say for now is true...

This is to say nothing of it having 60% of the health, dps, or range of the siege starship and having 80% of its cap and having that ship give aoe....all in exchange for half speed and about 25% cost...normally I like cheap units...but with starships the whole point is that you are paying top dollar metaphorically for a really strong unit...no need to skimp.

As lance said, the flagship line feels flimsy...it could use something else to make it feel like a "flagship"...its damage boosts are great for the mk I...the problem is starships only get a max 20% boost to damage and the free one wastes half its potential already. The higher mk flagships give an ok increase, but it is totally wasted if you pursue a starship only game....I'd be fan of another boost in addition to munitions...like armor...or limited group radar dampening..heck even rate of fire (ok ok that last one is crazy)

Why do starships only get a 20% bonus to attack again? They already feel so gimped, why add another nail in their coffin when I pursue MK III military station games?
« Last Edit: August 28, 2012, 11:34:54 pm by chemical_art »
Life is short. Have fun.

Offline Lancefighter

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,440
Re: My thoughts on current balance
« Reply #2 on: August 28, 2012, 11:53:02 pm »
Now that weve successfully scared them all off with a combined two thousand something words... I think logically ponies comes next?
Ideas? Suggestions? Concerns? Bugs to be squashed? Report them on the Mantis Bugtracker!

Author of the Dyson Project and the Spire Gambit

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: My thoughts on current balance
« Reply #3 on: August 28, 2012, 11:56:16 pm »
The Mk. III knowledge costs of starships I have harped about quite a bit about in the past. One particular thing I noted is that since there is no generic Mk. IV starship fabricator, and starships scale up linearly with mark, there is no reason why starships Mk. III should cost more in knowledge than fleet ships Mk. III.

Agreed with the Spire starship stuff. Its lower heath doesn't really work well with its current hull type (neutron, which the missile frigate gets a bonus against, which means goodbye durability), its range isn't long enough to make up for that lesser health, and the Spire beam (as they currently work) being a flawed weapon (for the reasons mentioned before).

In fact, this even applies to the Fallen spire stuff. The big power of the fallen spire stuff doesn't come from their main weapon (except against huge things like forcefields or stationary stuff), for the same reasons mentioned above. The reason they are so scary is due to their hugely powerful modules and high HP. Their main weapon doesn't really help them much.
Oddly enough, the spire beams as they work now work somewhat when used by stationary structures, as the stuff that is shooting at tends to be stationary as well (most fleet ships will stay still when targeting a stationary structure).

I would suggest two things.
1. Make spire beam weapons deliver more of their payload per frame, but make the beam live less long so that the total damage is the same.
2. Make the beam distance follow a similar logic to what the heavy beam turret's beams do: go to the first target, stop until the first thing is dead or out of the beam, then keep going, stopping on the next target until it is dead or out of the beam, etc, until the beam hits its max range. This way, if the thing with the Spire beam fires at something close, its beam won't be stuck at a pathetic range.

These changes may make spire beams OP, and if they do, spire beam weaponry may need to go down a bit in damage.

Hmm, Mantis?

Offline chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: My thoughts on current balance
« Reply #4 on: August 29, 2012, 12:00:06 am »
Now that weve successfully scared them all off with a combined two thousand something words... I think logically ponies comes next?

Guess I'll go to the Prancing Pony to learn new things.
Life is short. Have fun.

Offline Diazo

  • Master Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,717
  • I love/hate Diff 10
Re: My thoughts on current balance
« Reply #5 on: August 29, 2012, 12:00:42 am »
Alright.

I'm currently playing a starship only game and kind of agree and disagree.

First, Spire Starships need help bad. They have a neutron hull type, which the Missile Frigate has a bonus against.

A single shot from a single Mk I missile frigate does 2% damage to a Spire Starship Mk I.

This is in addition to the problems it has with it's gun that you've already listed.

The Zenith also has a neutron hull, but 50% more HP and an attack that can kill frigates in return.

Having said that, the Plasma Siege is a glorious unit that I'm building my starship fleet around.

I run a 40 unit fleet, 10 of which are Plasma Siege Mk I & II, everything else is along to keep those plasma siege alive.

I'm not sure what to say about the starship situation overall however.

I crashed a Mk II world with 700 ships, lost no starships cleaning it out.

Crashed a Mk IV world with 350 ships and lost 2 starships. (Stupid missile guard posts).

Both of those were with a 40 unit fleet, although it did including a champion and its shield ability.

Alright, what was my point? I'm not sure now.

I think starships could use some tweaks, especially Spire and Zentih and I'm not sure they got the polish they needed after being split into their own lines.

D.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2012, 12:03:14 am by Diazo »

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: My thoughts on current balance
« Reply #6 on: August 29, 2012, 12:09:43 am »
The Mk. III knowledge costs of starships I have harped about quite a bit about in the past. One particular thing I noted is that since there is no generic Mk. IV starship fabricator, and starships scale up linearly with mark, there is no reason why starships Mk. III should cost more in knowledge than fleet ships Mk. III.

Agreed with the Spire starship stuff. Its lower heath doesn't really work well with its current hull type (neutron, which the missile frigate gets a bonus against, which means goodbye durability), its range isn't long enough to make up for that lesser health, and the Spire beam (as they currently work) being a flawed weapon (for the reasons mentioned before).

In fact, this even applies to the Fallen spire stuff. The big power of the fallen spire stuff doesn't come from their main weapon (except against huge things like forcefields or stationary stuff), for the same reasons mentioned above. The reason they are so scary is due to their hugely powerful modules and high HP. Their main weapon doesn't really help them much.
Oddly enough, the spire beams as they work now work somewhat when used by stationary structures, as the stuff that is shooting at tends to be stationary as well (most fleet ships will stay still when targeting a stationary structure).

I would suggest two things.
1. Make spire beam weapons deliver more of their payload per frame, but make the beam live less long so that the total damage is the same.
2. Make the beam distance follow a similar logic to what the heavy beam turret's beams do: go to the first target, stop until the first thing is dead or out of the beam, then keep going, stopping on the next target until it is dead or out of the beam, etc, until the beam hits its max range. This way, if the thing with the Spire beam fires at something close, its beam won't be stuck at a pathetic range.

These changes may make spire beams OP, and if they do, spire beam weaponry may need to go down a bit in damage.

Hmm, Mantis?

I went ahead and posted this, 9397: Change how Spire Beam weaponry works some to make them worthwhile in the average case

I have still yet to post an issue about the Mk. III starship knowledge costs...I really need to get around to that eventually.

Offline Lancefighter

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,440
Re: My thoughts on current balance
« Reply #7 on: August 29, 2012, 12:09:58 am »
Come to think of it - That might be a potential solution as well. Why NOT have a generic mk4 starship fabricator? Ideally I would like to see it as part of the mk4 fleet ship factory, but i could definitely see it as a unique structure. It would enable more early game decisions regarding tech; Hey, theres a mk4 starship factory there, should I maybe focus more on starships this game?

As it currently is, if you happen upon a starship fabricator, you generally dont have the resources to support it early game.. and lategame its usefulness is significantly lower. (it uh, didn't help that in our game today, at least 5 distribution nodes WERE TROJANS LIKE SRSLY MAN.. Thankfully, they all died at basically no m/c anyway)

On hull types - I am torn on this. Thematically, the human/spire/zenith starships should have radically different hull types. Balance wise, it makes sense for bomber starships or artillery starships to be different hulls.
But I feel this also hurts starships a lot. What if there was an additional 'modifier' hull type? For instance, "heavy-starship" suddenly makes the just straight up take half as much damage? no, that feels wrong.
Maybe more, that a ship can have bonuses to both that are multiplicative - A bomber might have a 6x bonus to heavy, but also a .5 bonus to starships. A fighter might have whatever its bonus to polycrystal is, but it also might have a .2 to starships.
A dreadnaught might have nothing else, but a 5x to starships.. but a .5x to polycrystal.

Not really sure that is where I want to go on this (it adds an entire new level of complexity, that I am not really sure is warranted or needed, honestly), just throwing things out there.

Diazo - Did dreadnaughts recently lose their inability to actually hit small stuff? I initially went with bombers because of my low crystal reserves, but I am thinking I may just end up needing both, if the dreadnaught is the new dps core of the starship fleet
Ideas? Suggestions? Concerns? Bugs to be squashed? Report them on the Mantis Bugtracker!

Author of the Dyson Project and the Spire Gambit

Offline Diazo

  • Master Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,717
  • I love/hate Diff 10
Re: My thoughts on current balance
« Reply #8 on: August 29, 2012, 12:13:21 am »
Erm, several months ago, the dreadnaught went through several revisions before becoming the Plasma Siege starship it is today.

As part of that it no longer has any targeting restrictions, it has about the same range as missile frigates and one or two shots them depending on relative mark level.

The only starship with targetting restrictions is the Bomber Starship which has the 'can not target small ships' restriction.

D.

Offline chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: My thoughts on current balance
« Reply #9 on: August 29, 2012, 12:14:20 am »
Right now the spire and zenith have the same hulls, and I think they should not. Perhaps the flagship can stay heavy, one of the two earlier ships can be neutron, and the the third be polycrystal or close combat?
Life is short. Have fun.

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: My thoughts on current balance
« Reply #10 on: August 29, 2012, 12:14:42 am »
Come to think of it - That might be a potential solution as well. Why NOT have a generic mk4 starship fabricator? Ideally I would like to see it as part of the mk4 fleet ship factory, but i could definitely see it as a unique structure. It would enable more early game decisions regarding tech; Hey, theres a mk4 starship factory there, should I maybe focus more on starships this game?

As it currently is, if you happen upon a starship fabricator, you generally dont have the resources to support it early game.. and lategame its usefulness is significantly lower. (it uh, didn't help that in our game today, at least 5 distribution nodes WERE TROJANS LIKE SRSLY MAN.. Thankfully, they all died at basically no m/c anyway)

Yep, the idea of a Mk. IV starship fabricator was tossed around some, and I think there is a mantis issue about it (will post a link if I can find it)

Quote
On hull types - I am torn on this. Thematically, the human/spire/zenith starships should have radically different hull types. Balance wise, it makes sense for bomber starships or artillery starships to be different hulls.
But I feel this also hurts starships a lot. What if there was an additional 'modifier' hull type? For instance, "heavy-starship" suddenly makes the just straight up take half as much damage? no, that feels wrong.
Maybe more, that a ship can have bonuses to both that are multiplicative - A bomber might have a 6x bonus to heavy, but also a .5 bonus to starships. A fighter might have whatever its bonus to polycrystal is, but it also might have a .2 to starships.
A dreadnaught might have nothing else, but a 5x to starships.. but a .5x to polycrystal.

Not really sure that is where I want to go on this (it adds an entire new level of complexity, that I am not really sure is warranted or needed, honestly), just throwing things out there.

Diazo - Did dreadnaughts recently lose their inability to actually hit small stuff? I initially went with bombers because of my low crystal reserves, but I am thinking I may just end up needing both, if the dreadnaught is the new dps core of the starship fleet

I actually had an idea to split hull types into ship size and material, and have different sets of multipliers for each one. But considering that there is a armor (the numerical stat) balance/mechanic rework in the plans, I'm not sure what is happening with hull types.

Ideally, the distribution of hull types (and possibly, splitting hull types into hull material and ship size if the devs go with that) would be rebalanced at the same time as the armor balance/mechanic rework, as they both tie in quite strongly into the whole ship durability thing. But that may be too much work at once, IDK.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2012, 12:16:50 am by TechSY730 »

Offline Draco18s

  • Resident Velociraptor
  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,251
Re: My thoughts on current balance
« Reply #11 on: August 29, 2012, 12:16:40 am »
 Just some thoughts...

Leech starships are actually very powerful, moreso than an entire cap of equal mark parasites.
Spire starships suck.  Their beam doesn't rotate to match the target's current position, so 90% of the time it's firing off into empty space.

Offline Lancefighter

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,440
Re: My thoughts on current balance
« Reply #12 on: August 29, 2012, 12:20:43 am »
But considering that there is a armor (the numerical stat) balance/mechanic rework in the plans,

There is?

I was thinking maybe if not some sort of silly size modifier, maybe just making the armor a factor of ten higher or so would be enough? I always thought i kinda silly that a bomber had more armor than a starship (i think this is still the case? bomber mk5s have silly amounts of armor..)
Ideas? Suggestions? Concerns? Bugs to be squashed? Report them on the Mantis Bugtracker!

Author of the Dyson Project and the Spire Gambit

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: My thoughts on current balance
« Reply #13 on: August 29, 2012, 12:24:00 am »
But considering that there is a armor (the numerical stat) balance/mechanic rework in the plans,

There is?

I was thinking maybe if not some sort of silly size modifier, maybe just making the armor a factor of ten higher or so would be enough? I always thought i kinda silly that a bomber had more armor than a starship (i think this is still the case? bomber mk5s have silly amounts of armor..)

Oh wow, you missed quite a bit of spirited discussion. I'll see if I can try to dig up a link.

I think the new system Kieth decided upon was some sort of log based system based on the ratio of damage of each bullet of the weapon vs. armor, with some fancy considerations for armor piercing and armor rotting.

If I can find the post, it will explain it much better than I can.
The idea is that while it will be much trickier to work out the math in your head, it would be much easier to balance (and keep balanced as the game shifts) in the long run.

Offline Lancefighter

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,440
Re: My thoughts on current balance
« Reply #14 on: August 29, 2012, 12:26:25 am »
Why not just bring back old shields? I really liked them. I think they brought a lot to the game. Really allowed for absolutely hilarious space tanks. (and the old 5% chance to hit)

By the way - Whats the lowest amount of damage that can be dealt? Is it still 25%? I feel like that number has to be wrong.
Ideas? Suggestions? Concerns? Bugs to be squashed? Report them on the Mantis Bugtracker!

Author of the Dyson Project and the Spire Gambit