Free Allegiance Forums

OK guys, I haven't had all that much feedback on PCore009 yet but it's never too early to start talking about the next iteration!

In this iteration I'd like to look longer and harder at TF. Here are my thoughts:

Right now TF is underpowered. The problem that TF faces is its early game is incredibly soft since it lacks missiles, prox, and anything other than scouts to defend with (though its scouts are damn good at defending for scouts... despite the lack of prox). In addition their miners are pretty expensive.

P32 attempted to fix this by giving TF enh cons. All love to our incorporeal friend, but that didn't work and in my mind it encroached a bit on Giga's design space. It's weird to me that TF cons get to a sector before someone else's constructors and I haven't run the numbers quite yet, but I do believe TF cons are now faster than dreg basic cons.

To that end I'm very strongly considering reverting that change and letting TF start with lt booster already researched. There are a couple of reasons:

1) TF can't chase or run away from anyone without lt boost, which means that TF is always forced to either rip out from a bad fight (against an int or a fig) or watch its targets fly away for free.

2) TF is forced to either find or buy lt boost. This is similar to Giga's restrictions with boost1, etc. except that Giga usually has the option of finding boost2, etc., researching boost1, etc. (in 2 minutes), or taking it from their opponent's cold dead corpse. Giga's research option is also less restrictive because a) their early game costs a ton less and b) they start with a lot more money.

To reiterate: TF needs to buy or find lt boost.
Giga needs to buy or find boost 1 (etc.). BUT, Giga starts out with a lot more money and spends a lot less money on cons and miners and can research boost1 3x as fast as TF.

Also I plan to (finally) fix Belters med booster stuff. I forgot to do that in PCore009. Because I am a durdle like that.

Lt boost is extremely cheap, there's literally no reason ever for comms not to buy it right now. Giving it to them would just dumb the core down a little bit.

Allowing them to buy 2 sc's at a time again would be more helpful for their early game.

Yeah I'm inclined to agree with shiz here, this is a buff - but pretty limited in scope, and not really in the vein of what TF needs to become relevant again.

On med starting money you can buy an op, tp, miner and have 300 cr left over which you can pour into lt boost. Lt boost is $1875 so this will buy you ~1m of research time. In which time you'll have a payday coming in for 500 cr which can again buy you more time.

On average your first miner load as TF will dock around 1:30, which is also around when your cons will pop out. This means as your cons pop out you'll get money for a ref and your second miner pops out as well.

Then you can run a decent miner chain by pushing the second miner to sector behind your op, mine out a rock and push it forward to your op and split your two miners with one mining the op sector and one mining the ref sector.

This is a buff for all of 6 minutes, after which time it becomes TF as usual again. You need to focus on something that'll have a significant impact on their econ. Something that'll stay with them for all stages of the game. Right now they do alright during the early game, flounder during the mid game, and if they make it to late then they do ALRIGHT, assuming they didn't get wrecked mid game.

Just for you p1: Tf enh cons have the exact same speed as dreg basic cons: 80*0.9 = 72 = 60*1.2

I completely disagree by the way - TF needs no buff. Their lategame is great - best nans in the game, one of the best sbs in the game, best capships in the game - and its fine that its a bit of a struggle to get there. Its neither too hard nor too easy; scouts are great at exploiting weaknesses in the enemies miner d, while their long nan range makes for good miner d and epic xnanning bombruns - bombers which you can also use to defend.

Dont buff TF. They dont need your attention. There is a pretty damn huge issue that I've pointed out ingame over and over, even gotten some others to keep exploiting the damn thing, but since you havent said anything I now wonder if you heard about it at all. I'll let you figure it out.

Or you could just tell him

Didn't think I'd see the day when p32 goes full retard but here we are

Phantom032 wrote:QUOTE (Phantom032 @ Mar 23 2015, 05:20 PM) Just for you p1: Tf enh cons have the exact same speed as dreg basic cons: 80*0.9 = 72 = 60*1.2

I figured it was close like that. I couldn't remember if enh cons were 80 or 100 off the top of my head.

QUOTE Dont buff TF. They dont need your attention. There is a pretty damn huge issue that I've pointed out ingame over and over, even gotten some others to keep exploiting the damn thing, but since you havent said anything I now wonder if you heard about it at all. I'll let you figure it out.[/quote]
Let's assume that I haven't heard about it.

Not sure how anyone could miss belts sfs seeing how much play they got and how ridiculously awesome they are, but now you know.

Phantom032 wrote:QUOTE (Phantom032 @ Mar 24 2015, 03:59 PM) Not sure how anyone could miss belts sfs seeing how much play they got and how ridiculously awesome they are, but now you know.

I'm pretty sure that's known about, but you could have reminded him rather than be vague about it.

Deathrender wrote:QUOTE (Deathrender @ Mar 24 2015, 08:02 PM) I'm pretty sure that's known about, but you could have reminded him rather than be vague about it.

I am still allowed to be as vague as I want to. I cannot be vogue, as I have been forbidden to be anyone else.
...
Fine, some actually useful feedback.


P1: You probably shouldn't take inspiration in how Riot balances LoL, they do that because constantly having OP champs sells better, not because it is good balancing.

Main issues as I see them in games are (note: "small game" in this case is 5v5 or less)
1) belters tac - that backthruster strength is insane, and needs to be at least cut in half. Side thruster strength should probably be reduced by at least 25%.
2) people abusing giga con spam in small games, where there simply isnt enough people to stop the cons - i wasnt balancing for 5v5 or smaller and suggest you do the same, which means ignoring this. My last change increasing minigun damage against util hull helped a bit here, too.
3) people failing to use factions for their strengths, creating perceived strengths and weaknesses that are not real at all. A pack of 3 tf scouts suddenly showing up next to your miners is terrifying even in a 10v10, and getting around in a scout is no problem. Yet no one flies as a group unless specifically ordered. There is nothing you can do about it, except try to teach people how to use the tools you (as a core dev) are giving them (usually best done by playing and commanding yourself, or having other commanders pay attention to the forums). If players follow orders and it leads to success, there is a (admittedly small) chance they will remember and do the same thing next time without having their hands held.

Yes, 2 of 3 major issues being "small game" means there aren't enough properly sized games to actually decide what is good and what is not. Wish more people would play. /rant

Faction wise I think we are generally in quite a good place with the recent nerfs to OH (exceptions are phoenix sucking and drac still needing some fine tuning); and while I still disagree with some changes in 09, most of them are not upsetting the balance that badly (for example dregs yield bonus now allows them to lose around 1.5 full miners more a game, which while nice isn't game breaking with their costs and fragile miners).

On techpaths:
Ints can pod sfs, and sfs can pod ints, each depending on the tech and skill you have, but with maxed out hvys being superior to even lxy sfs, as long as you have some pp2 left to use (except of course belters, who just pod you while backthrusting).
Figs can generally win against ints, again depending on tech and skill, with lategame being fairly even between the two. Maxed out, winners depend on factions (model) and of course skill, with the advantage always on the defender: Fig rushing int: int can easily close. Int rushing fig: minepack, keep distance.
The only sup vs tac I saw was when belters was tac, which then ended every time as you can imagine if you have seen belts sfs in action once. Otherwise I would assume its a luck based thing - counter works on hunter, or counter works on seeker. Getting up real close should just end with the sf cloaking and getting back to distance, but could work for figs with scan GAs and hvy boost.
None of the three techpath matchups are especially problematic at any stage of the game. That doesnt mean they are equally viable as solo techpath to pursue, but its enough that none ends up being unstoppable (except belts tac).


TL;DR: I think the game is decently balanced, with commander and player skill playing a so much larger role than faction choice that the remaining differences are flavors and not weaknesses. You should probably focus on Phoenix and Draconium, once you fix belters tac. Finally, the monster that is shipyard is always lurking...

Phantom032 wrote:QUOTE (Phantom032 @ Mar 24 2015, 01:25 PM) P1: You probably shouldn't take inspiration in how Riot balances LoL, they do that because constantly having OP champs sells better, not because it is good balancing.

I don't. I prefer to use the Blizzard approach. The only "inspiration" I'm taking from RIOT is that I'm doing multiple little changes rather than few huge changes. I'd much rather let the community play with a changed faction for months on end and find the counters than react to a few people complaining about this or that. My first change was a slight tweak to dreg and peenix, two factions widely regarded as horrifically underpowered.

QUOTE Main issues as I see them in games are (note: "small game" in this case is 5v5 or less)
1) belters tac - that backthruster strength is insane, and needs to be at least cut in half. Side thruster strength should probably be reduced by at least 25%.[/quote]
I'll definitely take a look at that.

QUOTE 2) people abusing giga con spam in small games, where there simply isnt enough people to stop the cons - i wasnt balancing for 5v5 or smaller and suggest you do the same, which means ignoring this. My last change increasing minigun damage against util hull helped a bit here, too.[/quote]
If I were to make a change in this regard, it would be to buff minigun damage vs lt base hull/shield. Giga con spam in small games can be rough but two or three enh figs can easily kill giga lt bases provided people don't go full retard and mount 3 dis2 and 2 racks of ammo.

QUOTE 3) people failing to use factions for their strengths, creating perceived strengths and weaknesses that are not real at all. A pack of 3 tf scouts suddenly showing up next to your miners is terrifying even in a 10v10, and getting around in a scout is no problem. Yet no one flies as a group unless specifically ordered. There is nothing you can do about it, except try to teach people how to use the tools you (as a core dev) are giving them (usually best done by playing and commanding yourself, or having other commanders pay attention to the forums). If players follow orders and it leads to success, there is a (admittedly small) chance they will remember and do the same thing next time without having their hands held.[/quote]
One of the major issues I have with TF isn't so much that their scouts aren't good at killing miners in groups (they are!), but that TF scouts have a hard time accomplishing other objectives. A TF scout can't chase down an enemy prober/low sig scout/SF without lt boost, which it can't have for at least 6 minutes.

QUOTE Yes, 2 of 3 major issues being "small game" means there aren't enough properly sized games to actually decide what is good and what is not. Wish more people would play. /rant[/quote]
Speaking for myself, my IRL life has gotten suddenly busy, there are new games I'm trying to learn (mostly the Total War series, but I'm getting close to satisfied with my Empire: Total War game and Rome2 is likewise getting there), and certain in-game issues have made me much more likely to grab my Alleg friends and go play League.

(Plus this weekend was the Dragons of Tarkir prerelease which of course means that I was busy popping noses and winning boxes.)

QUOTE Faction wise I think we are generally in quite a good place with the recent nerfs to OH (exceptions are phoenix sucking and drac still needing some fine tuning); and while I still disagree with some changes in 09, most of them are not upsetting the balance that badly (for example dregs yield bonus now allows them to lose around 1.5 full miners more a game, which while nice isn't game breaking with their costs and fragile miners).[/quote]
I agree, I think the factions are very close. I think Phoenix needs something... not sure what, but it needs something and I hate going "full rework" because it's not my faction as much as I want it to be. I wish Noir was around. Drac could definitely use some fine tuning, but I haven't heard anything on their recent changes which makes me sad.

I did play a couple of games as Dreg and was a lot happier and felt a lot less constrained like I did previously. It felt, to me at least, that playing Dreg was to dance on the edge of a knife and it was too easy to fall off of it. That was reflected, at least somewhat, in a few things: the low numbers of times people would choose dreg, my personal experiences when commanding dreg, and (most importantly in my mind) the recent squadgame performances of dreg.

QUOTE On techpaths:
Ints can pod sfs, and sfs can pod ints, each depending on the tech and skill you have, but with maxed out hvys being superior to even lxy sfs, as long as you have some pp2 left to use (except of course belters, who just pod you while backthrusting).[/quote]
This goes back to "using the tools" and I agree with it. The reason I haven't really mentioned tac since taking over is because it feels like it's in a good place. Most of the losses I see against tac involve commanders who buy pp1 and think, "cool! We won the game!" and then just take a nap or pilots who go "I really need 3 racks of ammo with mini3 hvies to kill sfs, better not take along a second or third pulse probe" or both. My favorite moments against tac are when we "int" bomb with 2 turrets, 2 hvies with 6 pp2 each, and the rest in scouts. Much moar stronk than 4 ints with 1 pp1 and a single scout.

QUOTE Figs can generally win against ints, again depending on tech and skill, with lategame being fairly even between the two. Maxed out, winners depend on factions (model) and of course skill, with the advantage always on the defender: Fig rushing int: int can easily close. Int rushing fig: minepack, keep distance.[/quote]
Agreed. I also love Quickfire's role in this fight (as I've probably mentioned before). I love that QF isn't just "right click like a madman" or even "launch as soon as you have lock," that there's a significant reward for watching your opponent's countermeasures. I also love that *even if* every single QF hits, you still have to aim your gats properly and out fly your opponent to get the kill. Figs win this fight by using all the tools at their disposal (QF missiles, minepacks, better backthrusting). Ints win this fight by not plowing straight into prox and punching their opponent in the nose.

QUOTE The only sup vs tac I saw was when belters was tac, which then ended every time as you can imagine if you have seen belts sfs in action once. Otherwise I would assume its a luck based thing - counter works on hunter, or counter works on seeker. Getting up real close should just end with the sf cloaking and getting back to distance, but could work for figs with scan GAs and hvy boost.
None of the three techpath matchups are especially problematic at any stage of the game. That doesnt mean they are equally viable as solo techpath to pursue, but its enough that none ends up being unstoppable (except belts tac).[/quote]
Pretty much the only concern I have with sup v tac is the role of countermeasures. It just doesn't strike me as good gameplay when Sup actively wants to buy countermeasure 2/3 which also hurts their ability to hit SFs. Avoiding lose/lose situations is good.

I'm thinking that I'm going to tweak down Seeker dm class vs medium (ints, bbrs, gs) while also tweaking up their CM resistance. This would make it less painful for figs to purchase CM2/3 vs tac and giving seekers a more defined role. Sup is, at least in my mind, the "gadget" faction. They always have a tool for the job, whether it's dumbfires to kill miners, quickfires for dogfighting, etc.

Just a thought though.

QUOTE TL;DR: I think the game is decently balanced, with commander and player skill playing a so much larger role than faction choice that the remaining differences are flavors and not weaknesses. You should probably focus on Phoenix and Draconium, once you fix belters tac. Finally, the monster that is shipyard is always lurking...[/quote]
Fortunately we can just turn SY off

But yeah SY will probably be just about the last thing which gets touched by me. Eventually though I'd like to restore it to what it was in its heyday: the way to bust turtle stalemates. In my memory of this game, the best use of SY was either the PK v SysX games where we'd transition from hvy ints to battleship duels or those situations where the skill on one side isn't enough to punch through a pair of heavily camped alephs. Game stalls and turtling are horrible for the game and one of the major problems this game has always had. The problem largely went away when game sizes dropped from 15 v 15 to 5 v 5, but finishing off a game when the enemy has mini3 hvies (and you have mini3 hvies) and they're turtling in one sector is still a pita in the larger games.