|06/06/2010 07:22:55 Unit Rebalancing|
We may be doing some rebalancing of unit stats in the near future, testing on the Test Server first.
What kind of rebalancing would you like to see? There was a test run on the test server a year ago with a number of good ideas but they never made it live. Here is the thread about it: http://weewar.com/forum/posts/list/789.page
Basically, the Berserker was made a little stronger (repair 2 instead of 1), Helicopters could attack and block Subs, and the Destroyer was split into two units - a new Destroyer good against air + sub units and a Cruiser unit good against boat units. I think these are good ideas, but the exact numbers will probably need some tweaking.
As I had written here, cruisers were too weak against other boats, so perhaps their attack against boat should be raised from 14 to 15.
Let me know your thoughts on all of these ideas! I'll add links to some old threads for more ideas.
Helicopters attack subs
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 06/06/2010 07:43:52
|06/06/2010 10:41:25 Re:Unit Rebalancing|
|i found the split of the DD made two pretty weak boats.|
|07/06/2010 01:15:21 Re:Unit Rebalancing|
indeed. i don't think introducing the cruiser is the way forward. here is my suggestion (nothing new, everything has been said somewhere on the forums before):
keep the berserker's 1 repair and give it 1 auto-repair each round. this is a bit better than 2 repair and certainly justifies a price of 900.
introduce a deep-water tile. this tile gives subs +2 defence, hovers -1 and speedboats -2 defence. no effect on battle ships and destroyers. everything remains the same on normal water tiles, speedboats get +1 defence in general. like this a sub should win (in the long run) against a destroyer in deep water 1 vs 1 like the destroyer does in normal water.
this would make the sub a very strong unit, bearing also in mind that it can only be attacked by very few other units. therefore my last proposed change would be to allow helicopters to attack subs and have zoc on them. not quite sure which attack strength would be appropriate but i'd it should be a rather weak attack. this also increases the importance of helicopters which aren't build a lot at the moment.
that's it. discuss
nb: all this hinges on the introduction of a new tile. i have no idea whether this is something the weewar team would contemplate...
|07/06/2010 02:12:18 Re:Unit Rebalancing|
Just to make sure we're on the right track, what are the current perceived imbalances?
The first one that comes to mind is that whoever builds the most destroyers first pretty much wins.
1) What I just said about destroyers
2) Berserker is too expensive for what you get
3) AA is fairly useless
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 07/06/2010 02:14:32
|07/06/2010 03:00:40 Re:Unit Rebalancing|
i really like the idea of helis have a (moderately) weak attack on subs - this will fundamentally change the game in good ways - helis more useful and used, sea war more dynamic.
i like beserker 2 repair - while Shulgy's other idea on this is interesting, we should keep it simple.
Deep water tile as per Shulgy's/Cas/others' suggestion is an awesome innovation - will really help to balance subs and destroyers and other sea faring units, although for anyone who thinks, like fn000rd, that the most destroyers wins, you have to check out Stirling's sub spam on me in the north here: http://weewar.com/game/231612
Subs and BBs are already vital units, even if destroyers are a bit too strong.
I am undecided on the cruiser, but hey, if it's just on the test server, let's try it again!
fn000rd - did you mean assault artis or anti aircraft guns when you said "AA is fairly useless"? Neither of these units are useless, but anti aircraft guns are very important in most games where air power is a factor, where as assault artis are indeed somewhat marginal units. perhaps if they cost 400 instead of 450???
|07/06/2010 05:33:41 Re:Unit Rebalancing|
I'll look into how hard it would be to introduce a deep sea tile. I like that idea, but new tiles have not been added for years, if ever.
Stirling is one of the few players who knows how to use subs well. I've spoken with him about it before and he partially convinced me that destroyers are fine as they are; most of us just haven't learned how to use subs and BBs well enough to counter a fleet of destroyers
From previous forum comments by others, I think fn0000ord is saying the anti-air unit is too weak. I think the anti-air is decent for its price, but it would be nice to have a new, stronger or more armored, more expensive anti-air unit for times when you need a single-unit strong deterrent or counter to air units, kind of like the berserker for air. This is a pretty small niche to fill though.
We'll probably do a couple balancing iterations so if the first try isn't satisfying, we can try again. But let's try to get it right (or at least satisfyingly better) the first time.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 07/06/2010 05:38:35
|07/06/2010 13:37:20 Re:Unit Rebalancing|
nice to see the renewed interest in the game, even though its been brought up every year. But I like to caution on suggestion of new tiles and game rules. It be much easier on the devs to just focus one type of game enhancement. In the past there was a bunch of new suggestions and it always end up overwhelming the devs and nothing ever got implemented. Now there is only one dev(spade), so I recommend you help him out not overwhelm him.
So with that in mind let's keep posts about Unit re-balancing and the possibility of introducing new units.
1. Destroyer and subs are fine 90%. Most people just dont know how to use them and by the time they figure it out its too late to change the outcome of the game. The only time they dont work is because of map makers. There are several maps where you can delay a game indefinitely due to "Sub Squatting". The best way to counter this is to allow two units from each unit type(air,land) the ability to target subs. I prefer bombers to have a weak attack against subs, just like destroyers can hit aircraft from a far. Heli's are too weak and in my recommendation the a useless unit like zerks. I think I've built maybe 6 in all my games this year. As for land units either one of the artillery, or maybe heavy troopers, but only when the sub is located on a harbor. Now, all these units should only be allowed to attack subs, not block them via ZOC.
2. Anti-air is great at its current cost and abilities. They are good against troopers, and awesome against aircraft(from range). The key is to build more then one, most of the time I see people just spawn one Anti-Air. lol
3. Zerks are crap. They are best use as cannon fodder, and only when you have complete control of the game. They are not a game changer like DFA's. Either they get better repair, or some other ability like double fire, 1-2 range fire, or get removed from the line up.
1. Air Unit that can capture. Give helis this ability or make a new unit type.
2. Heavy Anti-Air(SAM missles). moves slow, better defense, longer range. Costly
3. Sniper(1-3 range infantry only against light vehicles and infantry), Heavy Machine Gunner infantry(double fire), or saboteur(un-captures an enemy building at end of turn or deals heavy damage to heavy units). These units can not capture buildings.
I have a shit load more ideas in my head, but I'm saving those for later.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 07/06/2010 13:38:22
|07/06/2010 16:54:39 Re:Unit Rebalancing|
|Mike beat me to it, but for Zerks I'd suggest either giving it two shots in a round like Battleships, or giving it a two shot range with an open line of sight. This doesn't mean it can shoot over units like Assault Artillery, but it needs to be able to "see" it's target. Makes sense to be that if it's a more powerful tank, it should have a better range.|
|07/06/2010 19:24:03 Re:Unit Rebalancing|
It takes 3-4 air units to defend anything from an aerial attack. I've seen this argument before, that you should just build multiple AA guns, but this ignores the fact that it would take 3-4 turns to build them all.
In smaller maps or lower income maps, this is just impossible to do.
|07/06/2010 20:02:22 Re:Unit Rebalancing|
Off Topic: If your opponent is able to save credits to build an aerial unit, then you are doing something wrong strategically.
I've successfully defended against an aerial attack with 1-2 Antis and Troopers. It is all about "corralling" the jet.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 07/06/2010 20:02:47
|07/06/2010 20:31:05 Re:Unit Rebalancing|
Also, the goal may not be to actually kill the jet with the AA, but just to damage it - either for a follow up kill by your jet, or not. If the goal is just to damage it, the jet will have to head back to an airport and repair, which takes precious rounds. It is tough pill to swallow, especially in a low income game, to have expensive units out of action for multiple rounds.
AA guns are also very effective against helis, which are more common in low income games.
|07/06/2010 20:37:04 Re:Unit Rebalancing|
Back to Spade's original questions:
I think you should try either deep sea tiles OR cruisers on the test server, not both at the same time, as it would be difficult to determine what was changing the balance of combat at sea in what ways if both changes were simultaneously implemented. This may be true for helis hitting subs as well. Isolate the variable
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 07/06/2010 20:44:10
|09/06/2010 12:11:45 Re:Unit Rebalancing|
the good thing about the current destroyer in weewar: ends games quickly
(if you sink enemy navy game is mostly over, because all coast bases become yours)
the bad thing about it: destroyer has no weak point except for attack range
imagine playing rock paper scissors and there is something like lasergun beating all other...
would want to play rock paper scissors with someone who always will take the lasergun whenever he can?
I experimented with split boat class units in weebot, sea battles got much more diverse tactical options like we are used from land battles:
in watermod we used the following setup:
battleships: same --> death on sea
cruisers: 5 range, 3 move, weak vs subs&air --> expensive artillery on sea
destroyers: 3 move, ~medium vs all --> medium all purpose attack unit on sea
frigates: 4 move good vs. AA & sub, weak vs rest --> support on sea
i dont dare say there should be even 4 boat class units, having the chant of all the konservative players in mind again. but more diversity on sea (1 more unit in boat class) would help the game a lot in my opinion.
with 3 boat units it could similar to testserver 2009:
battleship - same
cruiser - 3 move, some new advantage making it a bit stronger vs boat than on testserver
destroyer - 4 move, anti air anti sub, like on testserver (but lower cost than 900)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 09/06/2010 18:35:12
|15/06/2010 10:26:50 Re:Unit Rebalancing|
|ah sweet they want start the test server again x)|
|15/06/2010 16:20:10 Re:Unit Rebalancing|
My two bits:
1. Berserkers - Why do we need a significantly improvement here? The question should be whether land combat in general needs to be tweaked, not how we can make a particular unit more useful. As it is, heavy tanks/artillery fit the bill fine. Perhaps giving zerks repair 2 is warranted, but I wouldn't go much beyond that. Law of unintended consequences and all that.
2. Heli v. subs. - Absolutely. I'm for helis having zoc and attack functioning against subs, and not just when they are in harbors. But the attack strength should be small. Here's the balance I think we need to achieve: On one hand, we need an alternative means of protecting harbors (mostly through heli zoc) and breaking up sub blockades. On the other, we don't want to make the alternative so strong that it becomes a standard part of naval warfare in the open sea. Helis are the right fit because of their diminished range, strength, and cost compared to other air units, while as an air unit they still have sufficient range of movement to be useful against subs (which, compared to land units, are highly mobile).
3. Cruisers - Personally, other than the occasional sub issues addressed above, I like naval combat fine as it is. But since others seem to feel differently and favor the implementation of Cruisers, here are my thoughts: My recollection from the earlier test was that splitting the original destroyer into two specialized units by simply lowering alternate stats (rather than increasing anything) made for two overly weak units. If Cruisers are really to be the anti-ship unit, I think they need a longer range (1-4) and/or stronger attack (12?) than the original destroyer, especially if they have diminished mobility in comparison. (I'd also lower their strength against hard and soft units slightly so they don't become the default shore bombardment unit.) If destroyers are going to be mostly limited to anti-sub and anti-air, I'd also lower their attack range (1-2) and cost (800). With their movement range, they should have to get as close to an air unit as they currently do to a sub in order to do their damage.
Anyhow, that's what I'd like to try on the test server.