Part Stats Balance, Round 2

[keith.lamothe]

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%

[chemical_art]

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.

[Winge]

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.

[keith.lamothe]

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.

[keith.lamothe]

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?

[chemical_art]

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.

[chemical_art]

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.

[Teal_Blue]

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

[chemical_art]

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)

[keith.lamothe]

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.

[Teal_Blue]

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

[Tridus]

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).

[chemical_art]

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.

[Tridus]

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.

[chemical_art]

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.