Arcen Games
General Category => Bionic Dues => Topic started by: keith.lamothe on September 21, 2013, 01:36:03 pm
-
Starting a new thread as I imagine many of you tuned out of the last one after a couple pages ;) And you might tune right back out here, which is fine if you're not interested in the discussion.
Anyway, rather than drop an enormous table in this one, I'm just going to list all (well, almost all, not base-power-impact or power-cost-reduction) the stats with the lowest and highest values they can have on a part.
The Min values are what you could expect to see on day-1 commons, etc, and the Max values are what you could expect to see on single-effect commons somewhere around day 45 or so. Unless you're playing Meg, of course, because she cheats.
These values are from my working copy during 0.920 development, not the current public 0.919 build.
My question for y'all is: for each of these, are these reasonable values?
Thanks :)
Shield Stats
+X Max Shields
Min 25, Max 500
+X Damage Reduction
Min 3, Max 50
+X Regen
Min 5, Max 110
Propulsion Stats
+X Stealth Actions Per Mission
Min 3, Max 11
+X Trap Skill Level
Min 3, Max 27
+X Overload Level
Min 50, Max 2000
Computer Stats
+X Sensor Range
Min 1, Max 7
+X Hacking Points Per Mission
Min 3, Max 27
+X Virus Points Per Mission
Min 11, Max 212
+X Sentry Turrets
Min 2, Max 26
+X Mines
Min 4, Max 52
Weapon Stats (only affect that specific weapon)
+X% Attack Power
Min 10%, Max 100%
+X Attack Range
Min 1, Max 7
+X% Area Of Effect
Min 25%, Max 100%
+X% Ammo Capacity
Min 15%, Max 150%
Second-Order Stats (primarily found in reactor, but also just about anywhere)
+X% Total Power Generation
Min 12% , Max 60%
+X% To All Computer-Related Stats
Min 6%, Max 30%
+X% To All Propulsion-Related Stats
Min 6%, Max 30%
+X% To All Shield-Related Stats
Min 6%, Max 30%
+X% Attack Power To All Weapons
Min 6%, Max 30%
-
Wish I could provide more help.
I think I've just been spoiled that when I see a "rare" drop I expect something *unique* from it, rather then another improvement.
This is purely a personal thing.
-
High end of Virus points seems off the charts compared to the others. 100 Virus points is already more than I ever really need, and that's more than 200 on a single part! I would tune that one down towards 100-125 myself. The others seem reasonable to me. Obviously, just my opinion.
-
I think I've just been spoiled that when I see a "rare" drop I expect something *unique* from it, rather then another improvement.
This is purely a personal thing.
I don't think it's purely personal to you. In any event there's already a change in from earlier this morning for 0.920 that will make the higher-rarity stuff much better than the commons at low mark-levels. And some of the other changes will also help in that regard.
As far as actual unique stats that don't even show up below Rare or whatever, that is somewhat harder to make happen, yea. Generally when I see that in a procedural-loot game it's rare even among the rares.
-
High end of Virus points seems off the charts compared to the others. 100 Virus points is already more than I ever really need, and that's more than 200 on a single part! I would tune that one down towards 100-125 myself. The others seem reasonable to me. Obviously, just my opinion.
I honestly don't remember why it's on such a different scale than hacking, since I think the growth of their costs is similar (leaving aside bots that have a higher base virus cost).
Does anyone object to the virus range moving from 11-212 to 11-100?
-
As far as actual unique stats that don't even show up below Rare or whatever, that is somewhat harder to make happen, yea. Generally when I see that in a procedural-loot game it's rare even among the rares.
This sounds encouraging.
From "low" to "mid" tier items I expect there to be a "natural" progression of stats.
However, from "mid" to "high" grade items I expect there to be a much sharper then expected average, in part because I expect a much greater then average "rarity" at least from the user's perspective. In short, since I am not expected to farm often, I expect "rare" items to be stronger then average, unlike other games where farming is expected. In other words, some games almost demand farming, and balance as such, but this game does not, so "rare" items can be stronger then expected.
-
Looking over the notes, yes, it seems promising. "Low" to "Mid" values seems appropriate, as does "rare" and above items.
On paper, it seems good, I'll tell you in practice how it feels later.
-
High end of Virus points seems off the charts compared to the others. 100 Virus points is already more than I ever really need, and that's more than 200 on a single part! I would tune that one down towards 100-125 myself. The others seem reasonable to me. Obviously, just my opinion.
I honestly don't remember why it's on such a different scale than hacking, since I think the growth of their costs is similar (leaving aside bots that have a higher base virus cost).
Does anyone object to the virus range moving from 11-212 to 11-100?
Regarding virus points, i am not sure how many points are required to virus each bot? Or if they are different for each bot? Is it like 1 to 1, so i have the ability to virus over 200 bots in a mission? or is it 6 or 7 points per bot, and some 7 to 10 and so those 212 points give me about 15 + 10 (106 / 7 for first level, and 106 / 10 for second) for a total of 25 available bots i can virus in any given mission max. That seems reasonable, but only if the cost is in the 6-10 points for each bot range.
If you take that to 100, and it is 1 to 1, then it is still way more than i probably would use, *except at the final battle on day 50. But if the cost is 6-10 again, then 7+5 (50 / 7 for first level and 50 / 10 for second) for a total of 12 bots per mission might seem a little low, especially if there are how many bots in a average mission? 30 or so? (this is a guess off the top of my head from going through maybe a dozen missions so far, so i could be way wrong on this) which would be about a third? Well, maybe that isn't low after all. A third virused, gives me other options for the other two thirds.
*But 12 out of the range of bots in the final battle may not be enough. This is just my opinion, and based on what i am guessing are the cost values of virusing a bot, and the average numbers i am guessing are in a normal mission and also in the final mission. Which all means maybe i am guessing wrong.
Thanks for listening,
-Teal
-
High end of Virus points seems off the charts compared to the others. 100 Virus points is already more than I ever really need, and that's more than 200 on a single part! I would tune that one down towards 100-125 myself. The others seem reasonable to me. Obviously, just my opinion.
I honestly don't remember why it's on such a different scale than hacking, since I think the growth of their costs is similar (leaving aside bots that have a higher base virus cost).
Does anyone object to the virus range moving from 11-212 to 11-100?
Regarding virus points, i am not sure how many points are required to virus each bot? Or if they are different for each bot? Is it like 1 to 1, so i have the ability to virus over 200 bots in a mission? or is it 6 or 7 points per bot, and some 7 to 10 and so those 212 points give me about 15 + 10 (106 / 7 for first level, and 106 / 10 for second) for a total of 25 available bots i can virus in any given mission max. That seems reasonable, but only if the cost is in the 6-10 points for each bot range.
If you take that to 100, and it is 1 to 1, then it is still way more than i probably would use, *except at the final battle on day 50. But if the cost is 6-10 again, then 7+5 (50 / 7 for first level and 50 / 10 for second) for a total of 12 bots per level might seem a little low, especially if there are how many bots in a average mission 30 or so (this is a guess off the top of my head from going through maybe a dozen missions so far, so i could be way wrong on this) which would be about a third? Well, maybe that isn't low after all. A third virused, gives me other options for the other two thirds.
*But 12 out of the range of bots in the final battle may not be enough. This is just my opinion, and based on what i am guessing are the cost values of virusing a bot, and the average numbers i am guessing are in a normal mission and also in the final mission. Which all means maybe i am guessing wrong.
Thanks for listening,
-Teal
*caution: theory craft*
I'd imagine it is more a matter of strong bots simply don't cost enough, rather then the total number of points go down.
Simply being, if you build a pure virus bot, it should infect everything, but if not you can either infect many softer bots or a few stronger ones. But if you build a strong virus bot, it should infect virtually anything (including murder bots, although it should be basically be a "all-in strategy. You stack nothing but virus points to infect *one* and then your bot is done)
-
Looking at virus costs, it's currently... odd, I don't remember adding the 5. Actually, on second thought I think I do, as that allows roughly 2 level one virus attacks with the minimum effect (just 1 point shy of that, actually, will go fix that...)
Anyway, 5 + RobotLevel
Then some bots have an added amount, for WyvernBot and RaptorBot it's 8, for MurderBot it's 999 (heh), for most boss bots it's 10, and for the DoomBot it's 10.
I think this is from a series of iterations and the result doesn't actually make a lot of sense. Particularly with the "make this bot type harder to virus" being purely additive. Should probably be multiplicative.
Anyway, come Day 50 on normal you're probably facing level 15 or so bots on average, which means a virus cost of 20 each generally. Or about 11 bots per maxed out virus part.
-
Looking at virus costs, it's currently... odd, I don't remember adding the 5. Actually, on second thought I think I do, as that allows roughly 2 level one virus attacks with the minimum effect (just 1 point shy of that, actually, will go fix that...)
Anyway, 5 + RobotLevel
Then some bots have an added amount, for WyvernBot and RaptorBot it's 8, for MurderBot it's 999 (heh), for most boss bots it's 10, and for the DoomBot it's 10.
I think this is from a series of iterations and the result doesn't actually make a lot of sense. Particularly with the "make this bot type harder to virus" being purely additive. Should probably be multiplicative.
Anyway, come Day 50 on normal you're probably facing level 15 or so bots on average, which means a virus cost of 20 each generally. Or about 11 bots per maxed out virus part.
So my guess is, 15 bots at 20 cost is 300 points? So the 212 that was in there is closer to what we may realistically need come day 50? Which would mean, i think, that we "don't" want to reduce the points to 100? In fact, if i am understanding correctly (which i may not) :) that means we might want to nudge it up a bit, to the 300 we are averaging for that mission?
Or if you want padding, which i am not sure is a good thing for the player to have too much of, but if we do, then we might want it raised up above the 300? By say 50 or so points? (pure guess not based on anything) to say 350 or so points?
Does that seem reasonable, or out of whack?
-Teal
-
This is the max per item though. If it's 212 virus points on one item and I stick 3 on my epic ninja,I'm virusing ALL THE THINGS. A science expo would be goofy. So yeah, I think both the costs and the virus point progression need looking at again. Maybe use the same progression as hacker points, then multipliers for high end bots (1.5 for wyvern, 3 for doom, etc).
-
This is the max per item though. If it's 212 virus points on one item and I stick 3 on my epic ninja,I'm virusing ALL THE THINGS.
On the other hand, if you have 3 MAX ANYTHING parts, should you not it not be a guaranteed "tactic= successful" method?
How many "Max" things should one need for a tactic to be effective across the board?
In your example, you cite actually 2 modules, 3 MAX a module, then another module (stealth) which directly influences a strategy. In other words, you are truly maxing a strategy. In a game like this, if you are skilled/lucky enough to max a strategy, it should work even in mid game, otherwise the late game dictates the whole game (like in AI war). To elaborate, if you max a strategy, but it doesn't work late game, it really isn't a strategy at all for hardcore players.
-
At over 200 points per part, that's approximately 9 or 10 bots per part, per mission. Three of them would be most of the enemies on a standard map. Loading up every exo would let me virus everything, all the time.
What other single part is that effective? Particularily given that virused stuff works for me? It's just too good with so many points.
-
At over 200 points per part, that's approximately 9 or 10 bots per part, per mission. Three of them would be most of the enemies on a standard map. Loading up every exo would let me virus everything, all the time.
What other single part is that effective? Particularily given that virused stuff works for me? It's just too good with so many points.
I don't see the problem.
You pursue an "all-in strategy" for one purpose. Why is it bad that it works if your bots manage to get into point-blank range?
Perhaps it is that "if" that should be examined.
-
It's hardly all-in when it only requires my computer slots on one exo. I still have three more, and all my guns on all four which aren't affected and get their own upgrades.
I could do it on three of them and still even have hacking in a science exo. I'm not giving up much in exchange to be able to virus entire maps.
-
Again, it sounds like you are able to do so with default stealth values. I think that should be examined, or rather, the ease in which one can get into point-blank range to virus.
Do virus actions break stealth? They should unless {epic} ninja.
-
You could before,mbut it may have changed with the shooting from stealth. Doesn't really matter anyway, 600 virus points on the ninja is more than enough to wipe out a typical level. It's like the plasma cannon maxed AoE again, only slower.
-
If the 212 on a standard exo (is it the science? or ninja?) is too much for a single part, and as you say you can stack several parts on the exo, then perhaps you are right. Perhaps it is too much.
Chemical Art, am i understanding that you were asking about looking at making getting next to bot to virus them should be looked at? In other words, maybe make stealth more difficult? That might be interesting too, if it isn't a sure thing.
Maybe something like a stealth scanner on 'some' enemy bots that can see through the stealth? Something like that might make getting next to a bot harder.
Or have each move of the exo, maybe every three to ten moves? be calculated at a certain possibility of success? (not to much as it might throw too many calculations at the game) but what that could mean, is every 3 to 10 moves i get a new roll of probable success for 100% stealth effectiveness. Next roll what if i get 10% and am spotted on the second square i move to?
These are just ideas and may be too much work to get to. Simplest mechanic would be to not give so many stealth or virus points, or up the number needed for different bots so that our chances stay where they currently are, or lower.
Just some thoughts,
-Teal
-
212 is the normal number, it'd be 318 on a science. An epic science could still virus a murderbot even with that 999 virus modifier cost. It's not really worth doing that, but it's doable. It should come down to more like the hacking point numbers,which would let you do a few bots per part instead of double digits per part.
-
Your suggestion sounds reasonable to me, so that the ability is several bots per mission but certainly not all of them.
That would mean using other strategies in the mission to win, like weapons, or mines or sentries, or whatever...
-
Your suggestion sounds reasonable to me, so that the ability is several bots per mission but certainly not all of them.
That would mean using other strategies in the mission to win, like weapons, or mines or sentries, or whatever...
Or load up your exo with multiple virus parts. I carried 3 on my epic ninja earlier in the alpha and virused lots of stuff. 5 TigerBots on your side can do a LOT of damage. (Let alone what one DoomBot does...)
It's just the max one part can have, not an exo maximum. Multiples stack, and if you can virus 15 bots with a single exo you're going to get a huge swing in your favor, on top of that exo's guns. Ninjas happen to be the best at it because they can also stack a lot of stealth, which makes using the viruses safer. But if you can lure stuff to you and virus it that way, a Science bot would have 50% more virus points.
I used sentries on my Assault and mines on my Siege, so each one had some kind of special thing.
-
sounds like a good strategy, using different specials on each exo.
:)
-
On the note of the virus points, yeah, 200 is way too much per one part. A max of 100 sounds much more reasonable.
I do think some base costs for virus points per enemy bot need to be changed, though. I dont think the actual mechanics of how viruses work needs to be changed at all, after having experimented with it quite a bit, but some bots are definitely more powerful/useful than others when it comes to this. DoomBots, CommandBots, er...... blanking out on robot names here, I havent been awake long.... but various bots need to be a bit higher in cost. I dont think they need to be utterly ridiculous when it comes to cost... for example nobody is really going to virus something if it costs 100 or 120 points at mid-game, however useful it might seem.
I think having the base virus level always be just 5 plus the robot level is part of the problem here. Bot should probably have specific base values in addition to that. That CommandBot, for instance; give him a base of, say, 30 or 40. At mid-game he'd be potentially around 50-65 to virus, which sounds more reasonable for that particular bot, wheras in my current game (where I am halfway through), the CommandBot is about.... 20-ish, to virus? Too easy to get him. Same with various other bots.
If a bot is either very strong, or provides a useful special effect, it should be expensive to virus. I should have to consider the costs carefully; do I take this really strong bot, that has lots of attack power or provides such-and-such special effect yet costs 70 points, or do I try to grab multiple smaller, simpler bots for the same total cost, giving the enemy more targets they must shoot at and more distraction? Choices like that are what should be happening here with this mechanic.
This is all based on Expert mode, this feedback, so that's worth keeping in mind, probably. But yeah, I think the actual mechanics of virusing stuff is perfect, but the costs are definitely not. And 200 points coming offa 1 part is definitely too much.
As for viruses breaking stealth, I dont really think that'd need to be the case if those per-bot costs are corrected. One of the reasons virusing even works at all, particularly on expert, is BECAUSE it doesnt break stealth. Many situations where a virus is needed would basically REQUIRE an Exo sacrifice if that was the case. Perhaps instead, actions that dont break stealth could have a higher stealth cost, such as perhaps taking 5 points away on that turn instead of always just 1.
-
I'm still of.the opinion that if one is able to virus 15 Bots, the problem is not virus,'the problemoblem is being able to stealth virus 15 units to start with.
-
Quote - "Many situations where a virus is needed would basically REQUIRE an Exo sacrifice if that was the case. Perhaps instead, actions that dont break stealth could have a higher stealth cost, such as perhaps taking 5 points away on that turn instead of always just 1. " - Misery -
That sounds very reasonable. I didn't think an exo sacrifice would be necessary, But i haven't played enough games to know positively, but you may be right. But i suppose the question might then be, is a sacrifice of an exo something that is going to cost me the game? If i am not losing any exos at all on a regular basis, then perhaps
having missions where i lose several, or even missions that i lose all of them, then that would cause some tension in whether or not i can pull off the end game mission to win the game. Which might make things very fun! :)
Does that seem reasonable? I'm don't want to suggest making things crazy hard, but making it so it isn't a cake walk might make it more interesting, and perhaps more rewarding as well when we make it through it?
And I suppose as long as the virus numbers doesn't make the game too easy, or makes getting through a mission impossible. then that is probably what everyone wants from the viruses and stealth abilities anyway.
Anyway, i'm just thinking out loud, i could be completely wrong in how it all feels under playing conditions, its a little too easy for me to think something might not be a big deal, when in fact in the game it might be a very big deal. :)
Anyway, thank you for listening,
-Teal
-
Well, some of it definitely will depend on both the difficulty level chosen, and the player's individual playstyle, since there's generally alot of ways to approach things.
In my experience, on Expert, I can only stealth-virus so many bots not because of a lack of virus points, but because the stealth is necessary in order to not die, and there's only so much of it. I find alot of strategic uses for it that dont involve viruses, so it gets used alot and the remaining count goes down very fast. Other players though may be using different tactics, so they seem to have too much stealth count instead of never enough.
And of course all those different playstyles and the huge variety of situations the game can produce just makes this that much tougher to balance....
For now, increasing virus costs on bots is the best suggestion I have.
.....and I forgot what else I was going to say. Yay!
-
Again, it sounds like you are able to do so with default stealth values. I think that should be examined, or rather, the ease in which one can get into point-blank range to virus.
Do virus actions break stealth? They should unless {epic} ninja.
I found out the answer to this by accident: http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=12617. Not only does Virus not break stealth, it doesn't even cost a stealth action point right now--definitely a bug.
That said, it can be relatively easy to get close to enemies multiple times, sometimes without stealth. A lot depends on the map. On a map with lots of cover, I may be able to grab a DoomBot without even using stealth...I just cower behind boxes until the DoomBot charges in. Corners can be used similarly, although you will typically need to spend 1 Stealth Action Point to avoid taking a hit. The weaker 'buff bots' can be captured with no stealth if your virus bot has decent regen (one reason I like to make my Assault Exo my virus carrier).
Is that good or bad? I don't know. It might just be that bots need fewer starting stealth points, so that using them for a difficult virus conversion is that much more costly from the player's perspective.
-
Again, it sounds like you are able to do so with default stealth values. I think that should be examined, or rather, the ease in which one can get into point-blank range to virus.
Do virus actions break stealth? They should unless {epic} ninja.
That said, it can be relatively easy to get close to enemies multiple times, sometimes without stealth. A lot depends on the map. On a map with lots of cover, I may be able to grab a DoomBot without even using stealth...I just cower behind boxes until the DoomBot charges in. Corners can be used similarly, although you will typically need to spend 1 Stealth Action Point to avoid taking a hit. The weaker 'buff bots' can be captured with no stealth if your virus bot has decent regen (one reason I like to make my Assault Exo my virus carrier).
Seeing that stealth is always a one shot method of eliminating threats, it is true that hiding around corners can allow it to be abused.
I can see a few ways to get around it: (not, not all would be used at the same time)
Stronger enemies 2 turns before infection. Strongest enemies need 3 turns. Maybe unable to stealth during this time.
Using virus will stealthed breaks stealth
Using virus while stealth caused extra "stealth points" to be used up
-
Seeing that stealth is always a one shot method of eliminating threats, it is true that hiding around corners can allow it to be abused.
I can see a few ways to get around it: (not, not all would be used at the same time)
Stronger enemies 2 turns before infection. Strongest enemies need 3 turns. Maybe unable to stealth during this time.
Using virus will stealthed breaks stealth
Using virus while stealth caused extra "stealth points" to be used up
If it takes 3 turns to virus a DoomBot and you can't stealth during that time, nobody is ever going to do it. 3 turns with a DoomBot coming after you (after you had to be at point blank range to virus it) is suicide. I'll be using the rocket launcher to deal with those cases instead.
-
If it takes 3 turns to virus a DoomBot and you can't stealth during that time, nobody is ever going to do it. 3 turns with a DoomBot coming after you (after you had to be at point blank range to virus it) is suicide. I'll be using the rocket launcher to deal with those cases instead.
Well, yes, thats the point. It is meant to be hard. Otherwise, why wouldn't you virus it every time?
Right now, virus is a very high reward method with very little risk if you use tactics and have the points for it (lure enemy into corner). The "high-risk" needs to be put back in. How this is done should be debated, but I think it is needed.
-
I really don't understand what you're trying to say in this thread. In one set of posts you're saying that it's fine that one virus part can have 200 points and virus tons of things. Now you seem to be advocating making those points unusable against anything actually worth hitting with a virus.
And what do you mean by put high-risk back in? It was never high-risk in the first place. The limited use abilities are all powerful. Shooting stuff with the rocket launcher from across the map isn't high-risk either, and unlike waiting 3 turns without stealth for a virus to kick in isn't suicidal. Under that ruleset, I'd skip viruses entirely and bring more siege exos.
-
I really don't understand what you're trying to say in this thread. In one set of posts you're saying that it's fine that one virus part can have 200 points and virus tons of things. Now you seem to be advocating making those points unusable against anything actually worth hitting with a virus.
I'm advocating it is fine to virus many things, but the risk of attempting the virus itself is too low right now, especially in proportion to harder things.
Right now, if one has the points and knows how to game the AI, virus is a "I win" button in terms of great reward and no risk.
-
Seeing that stealth is always a one shot method of eliminating threats, it is true that hiding around corners can allow it to be abused.
I can see a few ways to get around it: (not, not all would be used at the same time)
Stronger enemies 2 turns before infection. Strongest enemies need 3 turns. Maybe unable to stealth during this time.
Using virus will stealthed breaks stealth
Using virus while stealth caused extra "stealth points" to be used up
I'd be interested to see exactly how you're doing this virusing without stealth bit, because from what I've seen.... it doesnt work. Not unless the enemy bot has an attack range of exactly 1.
I'm not sure just what you're seeing in your own game, but when I attempt that strategy, against pretty much any enemy, what actually happens is this:
(http://i.imgur.com/CPoWPjF.jpg)
As you can see, he's already aiming at me. He doesnt need to step onto the tile in front of me to hit me, and thus, he wont do so, and thus wont get virused easily. To virus him, I *have* to take at least one step forward, and certainly on Expert mode, doing such a thing WITHOUT stealth is generally suicide. A great many enemies can either kill you in a single blow, or maul you so badly that they may as well have. Masterminds like the one shown there are weak (though he'd still do 70 damage to me with his current attack power at level 12, and that's a significant amount on Expert where your shields start out VERY low), but there's an army behind him that you cant see in the screenshot. And it's a Mastermind, which means that the army behind him is *really* nasty right now from getting that buff.
This situation is why I suggested simply having a stealth cost when doing this type of action. Granted, that's not a perfect solution.... eventually the stealth cost might become the main cost for viruses, determining how many you can use instead of the virus count determining it like it should.
Even then though.... one thing I'm also not finding, is that I'm not finding that virusing things is all-powerful. Most things that I hit with viruses *will* die rather quick, sometimes without managing to deal damage (and I'm very selective about what I will use viruses on, so I'm not using them on weak, pathetic things or anything). Even the mighty DoomBot has occaisionally gone down after firing a single shot, if that, when I turn him against his fellow bots. It may be better on lower difficulties... I'm not sure, as when I was playing on Normal I didn't really use it much at all. On Expert though, at least with my playstyle, it's never quite that simple, and it doesnt act as a win button; it's just another strategic tool. I actually consider mines to be much safer to use (even if they require alot of preparation), and they're my emergency weapon if something truly threatening is coming, instead of the viruses. I put hacking and mines over viruses in terms of importance (though I dont put them all on the same Exo, that'd end badly). Others may disagree of course, but for me this is the case. Not that virusing isnt powerful, because it is.
I'm going to try to think up more suggestions though for how this might be balanced a little better, but right now the best suggestion I can come up with is increasing the virus cost of certain bots by a good amount. Though the "more stealth points used" idea really isnt a bad one either.
And if I'm not making sense somehow here or outright missing something, I apologize; I'm about to go to bed here and am a bit tired, so.... yeah.
-
I'm not in a mood to argue, actually, I am saying it flatly.
Hacking > killing a unit outright, therefore, it should be harder.
Right now, if one has stealth, hacking is just as hard as killing. Get unit to corner, stealth for one turn, hack, win.
There needs to be more risk, otherwise hacking is OP.
-
Except that your solution breaks viruses to the point of uselessness, like Misery explained. Stuff can shoot you before you can virus it, without stealth. If virusing breaks stealth and takes a bunch of turns to kick in, the exo that does the virusing is dead. Period. There is no reason to ever do that over shooting or doing something not-suicidal with the part slots (mines, turrets, or stack up some door hacking and don't bother with a science exo).
It already is harder than just shooting it, seeing as how I can shoot it from across the room or as they come around the corner (and thus always get the first shot).
Aside from fixing the virus costs on the bots (and the part giving too much), I don't think we should do anything else to it this close to release. Figure it out post 1.0. Particularly not something that's going to cripple it entirely.
-
And I'm saying that one cannot shoot from stealth, one shouldn't virus from stealth, period. Otherwise, that is game breaking form my perspective.
I appreciate how some are butchering my suggestions (assuming a maybe statement within a multi-prong statement = a must statement), but that won't dissuade me from my original view that stealth + virus is OP
-
And I'm saying that one cannot shoot from stealth, one shouldn't virus from stealth, period. Otherwise, that is game breaking form my perspective
If every gun had a range of 1 that would probably be a fair comparison. But I can shoot stuff from the other side of the map, or around the corner. Viruses as they stand right now flat out aren't worth using if you can't use them from stealth.
-
And I'm saying that one cannot shoot from stealth, one shouldn't virus from stealth, period. Otherwise, that is game breaking form my perspective
Viruses as they stand right now flat out aren't worth using if you can't use them from stealth.
I disagree. It is far too easy to isolate units, then get to a corner, and virus. I don't stealth for this.
-
This is just an opinion, but i believe that Tridus has a point, if it becomes much harder to use viruses against bots, then the usefulness is voided and players will simply rely on other tactics, which to be honest is not really the purpose as virus was introduced to do exactly what it is doing.
If it is too easy to do it, then perhaps at higher difficulties, it is not.
Or if it is even there, then perhaps it is used to replace the shrinking usefulness of other weapons against those bots. Which is a strong possibility.
In addition, rather than doing a complete overhaul to the virus tactic and how it is done, some small tweaks to slight increases in cost, either to stealth or to the virus points themselves would address that. So players who feel it is a magic button, now feel that it cost them something to use it, something that sometimes they are not going to be able to afford. So it limits the over-powered feeling of the tactic.
Also, the increase in cost may be acceptable to the players that do use it often to balance themselves against stronger or longer range opponent bots, as a necessary cost of using that action.
This of course was already proposed by Misery and Tridus and seems to me to address all of the concerns and to do it in a way that doesn't alienate one side or the other.
Thats my two cents, but i agree that tweaking costs with this sounds like a reasonable alternative to both sides on virus and stealth use.
:)
-Teal
-
I'd be interested to see exactly how you're doing this virusing without stealth bit, because from what I've seen.... it doesnt work. Not unless the enemy bot has an attack range of exactly 1.
You're mostly correct. In that situation, you need at least one Stealth (and probably more, since you mentioned a very angry army behind those).
The only way you can virus without tanking damage or using a stealth point is if you can isolate an alerted bot behind cover. If I get the chance, I'll post a pic. Obviously, that is very rare; I almost always either take a light hit (if I'm virusing a lower-damage buff bot) or stealth up. I also almost never virus bots in groups, as neither they nor I last long. That's a "nuke them from orbit" kind of solution--I <3 rocket launchers!
One possibility for higher difficulties would be to decrease the starting number of stealth actions, and buff the stealth granting items. Then, what items and strategies the player uses become much more a matter of choice, rather than being able to do everything really well. Really, this might need to be done anyways--Exos get a lot of starting stealth actions. I suppose that the number of starting stealth actions could scale with difficulty like shields, although that might be too much.
Thoughts?
Edit: How to capture bots without spending Stealth Points
(http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=13917.0;attach=7863;image)
(http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=13917.0;attach=7865;image)
-
I'd be interested to see exactly how you're doing this virusing without stealth bit, because from what I've seen.... it doesnt work. Not unless the enemy bot has an attack range of exactly 1.
You're mostly correct. In that situation, you need at least one Stealth (and probably more, since you mentioned a very angry army behind those).
The only way you can virus without tanking damage or using a stealth point is if you can isolate an alerted bot behind cover. If I get the chance, I'll post a pic. Obviously, that is very rare; I almost always either take a light hit (if I'm virusing a lower-damage buff bot) or stealth up. I also almost never virus bots in groups, as neither they nor I last long. That's a "nuke them from orbit" kind of solution--I <3 rocket launchers!
One possibility for higher difficulties would be to decrease the starting number of stealth actions, and buff the stealth granting items. Then, what items and strategies the player uses become much more a matter of choice, rather than being able to do everything really well. Really, this might need to be done anyways--Exos get a lot of starting stealth actions. I suppose that the number of starting stealth actions could scale with difficulty like shields, although that might be too much.
Thoughts?
I like your idea of having the majority (if i am understanding correctly) of the stealth, or virus points going into the parts and not part of the built in abilities of the exos, and as you say, in that way it becomes a matter of those that use stealth and virus alot, can buff their exos with those parts. While those that feel it is overpowered or a magic button can choose to play without those buff parts.
Nicely analyzed. :)
I second the motion.
-
I'd be interested to see exactly how you're doing this virusing without stealth bit, because from what I've seen.... it doesnt work. Not unless the enemy bot has an attack range of exactly 1.
You're mostly correct. In that situation, you need at least one Stealth (and probably more, since you mentioned a very angry army behind those).
The only way you can virus without tanking damage or using a stealth point is if you can isolate an alerted bot behind cover. If I get the chance, I'll post a pic. Obviously, that is very rare; I almost always either take a light hit (if I'm virusing a lower-damage buff bot) or stealth up. I also almost never virus bots in groups, as neither they nor I last long. That's a "nuke them from orbit" kind of solution--I <3 rocket launchers!
One possibility for higher difficulties would be to decrease the starting number of stealth actions, and buff the stealth granting items. Then, what items and strategies the player uses become much more a matter of choice, rather than being able to do everything really well. Really, this might need to be done anyways--Exos get a lot of starting stealth actions. I suppose that the number of starting stealth actions could scale with difficulty like shields, although that might be too much.
Thoughts?
Hm... this method you show doesnt use corners though? Chemical_Art, is this the way you're doing it as well? Ah, I feel like I"m missing something here. Not that THAT is anything new, hah.
The method displayed here is not a problem with stealth or viruses, it's a problem with the bot's AI. There's actually *lots* of ways to take advantage of that behavior that have nothing to do with viruses. I've realized it's a bit of a problem in various ways, but hadnt considered it important enough to bring up, in the face of the game needing lots of other types of testing first. Though, virusing with this method only works if you get the bot entirely on it's own, cut off from it's allies. Wouldnt be a good move otherwise, particularly with so many bots with extreme range around. ....or is that mostly Expert mode? I forget if enemy range scales by difficulty level.
As for the amount of starting stealth, you could probably decrease that a bit overall, even on lower difficulties. I think every Exo needs at least a LITTLE of it.... just to alleviate player frustration from mistakes made (which is important), and for various strategies to work.... but having more of it come from items instead of too much coming from the Exo itself would fit in line with the other abilities.
Also, one new idea does occur to me: One of the problems with viruses is that the bot grabbed is immediately a battle asset; what if this were not the case? Let's say you grab a bot with virus, right, well, what if it took 5 (or even more) turns for the virus to fully act upon the bot? You would virus the thing, and it would..... sort of just shut down, until the virus runs it's course. This means that virusing something in the middle of a heap of other bots is going to mean you get a useless bot that *will* just die, because other bots would happily attack it during it's shut-down phase. Even the mighty DoomBot would be useless if grabbed in this way. You would HAVE to work to isolate the bot in question if you wanted to do it this way. This would give the player some options: If they really wanted to they could still choose to use the virus to whittle down an enemy group, picking one of them off.... but they would gain no additional benefit because the bot would be flattened instantly. But if they wanted to USE the bot, they'd have to isolate it FIRST, and THAT isnt always so easy (though it IS kinda easy on lower difficulties).
And yes, I know one of the arguements for this is that it instantly defeats a bot essentially, but I dont think that's all that much of an issue, honestly. On lower difficulties, *most* bots can be defeated instantly if you have your weapons set up right, and if you know how to do it. Even on Expert, this can be done. Being able to KO enemies immediately at times is not, I think, a problem unless you're doing it like ALL the time, or in some extremely broken way (like getting 50 rockets and then using them to blast through walls, or something). And simply knocking out one bot.... or even 5.... with this isnt going to alter the difficulty all that much. There's just too many bots per mission for that to be the case. The main reason why it can whittle them down more than that is indeed the simple fact that they can instantly fight for you, thus my above suggestion. And even that is going to depend on the bot; some of them can be helpful yet can barely do damage.
-
Giving virus'd bots a couple turns of paralysis would be very easy to do :)
And the Epic Ninja could just have like 1 turn of virus-paralysis instead :D
Though I guess it gets all the fun specials. Maybe Epic Science.
-
http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=12654 (http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=12654)
OT but not related to hacking.
-
I'd be interested to see exactly how you're doing this virusing without stealth bit, because from what I've seen.... it doesnt work. Not unless the enemy bot has an attack range of exactly 1.
You're mostly correct. In that situation, you need at least one Stealth (and probably more, since you mentioned a very angry army behind those).
The only way you can virus without tanking damage or using a stealth point is if you can isolate an alerted bot behind cover. If I get the chance, I'll post a pic. Obviously, that is very rare; I almost always either take a light hit (if I'm virusing a lower-damage buff bot) or stealth up. I also almost never virus bots in groups, as neither they nor I last long. That's a "nuke them from orbit" kind of solution--I <3 rocket launchers!
One possibility for higher difficulties would be to decrease the starting number of stealth actions, and buff the stealth granting items. Then, what items and strategies the player uses become much more a matter of choice, rather than being able to do everything really well. Really, this might need to be done anyways--Exos get a lot of starting stealth actions. I suppose that the number of starting stealth actions could scale with difficulty like shields, although that might be too much.
Thoughts?
I like your idea of having the majority (if i am understanding correctly) of the stealth, or virus points going into the parts and not part of the built in abilities of the exos, and as you say, in that way it becomes a matter of those that use stealth and virus alot, can buff their exos with those parts. While those that feel it is overpowered or a magic button can choose to play without those buff parts.
Nicely analyzed. :)
I second the motion.
Increasing the need for specialized equipment to be able to pull off many stealth virusing would be a possible way to approach this.
But why not go a step further? If either virus or stealth would be changed to go into the same slot type as the other there would be a direct trade-off: An Exo with multiple items boosting stealth would not be able rack up quite as much in terms of virus points and vice versa.
Thoughts?
-
Just an opinion, but stealth can be used in a number of ways, to avoid crowds of bots, to virus a bot, to get close enough to use an aoe rocket on a group of bots...
However virus is not quite as versatile, it relies on stealth to get close enough, because we can't virus at a distance.
Your suggestion of one imbalancing the other is really to my mind not quite a fair trade off. If you want to limit viruses then fine, give me a limit on the number i can carry in parts or in exo, or in total. Or limit stealth if you feel it achieves some purpose or avoids an OP situation.
But your current suggestion gives me one, but denies the other and handicaps me in the process. Not in a way that is easily solvable in another way, but by denying me the use of either the means to get close enough to virus, or the ability to virus itself.
I just really, really don't see how this balances anything to the player. In fact in my opinion it unbalances it.
Sorry to disagree, but that's what it looks like to me.
-Teal
-
So, with 0.920 out now:
1) How do new parts (remember, old save parts are unchanged) with +attack and such feel?
2) How does virus feel?
-
I haven't had a chance to test the virusing process yet, but will give you a holler when i do. :)
I did run across 2 small issues that i'm going to put into mantis, when accessing a computer terminal i got something, but nothing appeared on the message log, and i don't know what happened. (just a quick add, but all of the terminals gave me negative things this time, though up til now its been mostly good, so maybe its just balancing out)
Second issue is even stealthed, sometimes some bots will see me when i come into range (still 4 or 5 squares out from them)
Thank you for listening,
-Teal
-
2) How does virus feel?
The virus numbers on parts seem alright; however, I think the multiplier for virus costs (http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=12683) on strong enemies is a bit too high...
Others can feel free to chime in on their opinion of that balance point.
-
It does seem like a lot, but i don't know how many points to carry is normal now. And i am assuming this is the new weighting on the bots that is causing this?
I can understand weighting as some bots are more 'valueable' than others.
But is 110 too high?
If it is, then what is more reasonable?
How many bots is reasonable to virus in a given game?
casual - level 1 bots, no advanced bots - 1 to 1 points? increases by 0
casual - level 1 bots, advanced bots - 2 to 2 points?
casual - level 2 and above bots - 3 to 3 points?
easy - level 1 bots, no advanced bots - 3 to 5 points? increases by 2
easy - level 1 bots, advanced bots - 5 to 7 points?
easy - level 2 and above bots - 7 to 9 points?
normal - level 1 bots, no advanced bots - 9 to 12 points? increases by 3
normal - level 1 bots, advanced bots - 12 to 15 points?
normal - level 2 and above bots? - 15 to 18 points?
hard - level 1 bots, no advanced bots - 18 to 22 points? increases by 4
hard - level 1 bots, advanced bots - 22 to 26 points?
hard - level 2 and above bots? - 26 to 30 points?
expert - level 1 bots, no advanced bots - 30 to 35 points? increases by 5
expert - level 1 bots, advanced bots - 35 to 40 points?
expert - level 2 and above bots? - 40 to 45 points?
misery - level 1 bots, no advanced bots - 45 to 51 points? increases by 6
misery - level 1 bots, advanced bots - 51 to 57 points?
misery - level 2 and above bots? - 57 to 63 points?
Which strikes me as approximately about half what it is now at the highest difficulty.
Does that seem reasonable and workable?
-Teal
p.s. actually, you know what, i thought i was being helpful trying to figure this out, but to be honest looking at it, i think this weighting this is over my head.
I mean having a whole casual game go through 50 days of missions on a cost of 3 max? Does that sound reasonable or broken? I don't think i quite got this idea figured out as well as i wanted to.
-
Depending on the bot, I don't think it's necessarily too high. One part can have more than that, before computer stat boosters.
Obviously not for a Dumbot. :)
-
right now i feel like a dumbot. :) time for bed, or a movie and no more number crunching, haha. :)
-Teal
-
So, early experience with the new patch, some of the various stats are muuuuuuch better. It's possible now for weapon parts to have enough effect to make things like the laser rifle and such be at least decent. They still wont put out anywhere near the damage potential of the "heavy hitter" weapons, but they can be viable in a fight now. My assault exo can sort of accomplish things sometimes now :D
On top of that, I found a sentry part, finally.
Cant say much else yet. The game has enjoyed giving me mostly weapon and stealth items in the couple of missions I just did.
-
So, early experience with the new patch, some of the various stats are muuuuuuch better. It's possible now for weapon parts to have enough effect to make things like the laser rifle and such be at least decent. They still wont put out anywhere near the damage potential of the "heavy hitter" weapons, but they can be viable in a fight now. My assault exo can sort of accomplish things sometimes now :D
On top of that, I found a sentry part, finally.
Awesome, glad to hear there's improvement :)
Please let us know if something still doesn't seem right.