Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ra balance #9959

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

@ghost
Copy link

commented Nov 10, 2015

Erred on the side of caution with these changes but aimed to make each unit more unique. If they need buffed further / completely changed, feel free. The Tesla tank still needs its double zap.

General reasoning;
-Chronotank is now more viable at repetitive hit and run.
-Phase transport is better for flanking and deploying troops. LoS out-ranges a turret but not a coil.
-Tesla tank can now (soon to be burst) attack targets via drive-by and whilst retreating.

Chronotank
-charge time reduced from 20s to 12s

Phase tank
-passengers increased from 3 to 4
-speed increased from 113 to 142 (matches APC)
-LoS increased from 6 to 7 cells (matches Tesla tank)

Tesla tank
-no longer needs to turn and face the enemy to fire
(Needs double zap)

@cjshmyr

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Nov 10, 2015

There were discussions with active players on IRC that influenced these; I'm in favor of the changes. I think it would be nice to also lower the cost on some of them (these are expensive Light armored units acquired late game), but I might be a minority.

@pchote pchote added this to the Next release milestone Nov 10, 2015

@ghost

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

commented Nov 11, 2015

My thinking was to try and turn these units from being completely unviable or one trick ponies into powerful but weak support units that reward intelligent play. These buffs should hopefully increase their survivability along with their effectiveness, which is why I wanted to hold off on the price reduction until we get player feedback on these changes.

If testing proves this false; feel free to make changes including dropping the price. As a player though, I'd rather pay a few extra $$$ to gain a unit that opens up otherwise non existent strategies.

@ghost

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

commented Nov 11, 2015

Finally figured out a non bogus upgrade rule.

As to why it has been implemented this way; it was suggested to me on IRC. If this is still the incorrect implementation (or other upgrade rules are needed) please advise.

{
var delay = node.Value.Nodes.FirstOrDefault(n => n.Key == "ChargeDelay");
if (delay == null)
node.Value.Nodes.Add(new MiniYamlNode("ChargeDelay", "300"));

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@Phrohdoh

Phrohdoh Nov 11, 2015

Member

But now there is a difference between the engine fallback and the value you're inserting into yaml.

@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ namespace OpenRA.Mods.RA.Traits
class PortableChronoInfo : ITraitInfo
{
[Desc("Cooldown in ticks until the unit can teleport.")]
public readonly int ChargeDelay = 500;
public readonly int ChargeDelay = 0;

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@cjshmyr

cjshmyr Nov 11, 2015

Member

Set this to 500, don't rely on the upgrade rule to be ran.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@ghost

ghost Nov 11, 2015

Author

I guess I completely misunderstood the initial discussion on all this. Fixing.

DArcy Rush added 3 commits Nov 10, 2015
DArcy Rush
Reduce chronotank charge time.
Chronotank charge decreased from 20s to 12s.
DArcy Rush
Rebalance phase transport.
Passengers increased to 4, speed and LoS increased.
DArcy Rush
Rebalance Tesla Tank.
Allow attacking of target regardless of facing.
@ghost

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

commented Nov 11, 2015

Fixed and updated. Thanks all for the input.

@abcdefg30

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Nov 11, 2015

If you don't change the default value in C#, you don't need an upgrade rule.

@ghost

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

commented Nov 11, 2015

Upgrade rule removed, thanks for the info.

@penev92

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Nov 11, 2015

Sure, why not 👍

@Micr0Bit

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Nov 11, 2015

so far we didnt receive any response to #9668
but i tell you what i think about these balance-changes ...

buffing the "phase-transporter" is not needed ... the idea behind it , isnt deploying "troops" ... its "sneaking in special units" ... the phase-transporter is also not a "scout" unit ... (so i dont really understand the LoS-Buff) ... the speed also doesnt have to match the soviets APC , cause he is still "invisible" ...
if anything , we should work out a better solution "detecting" him ... cause all the defense-strucures and radars makes it not really interesting to give it a try (on certain maps) , also ... maybe a buff for the weapon somewhere in the future

the crono and teslatank buff sounds good ... as "trade one allies-buff for a soviet-buff" but ...

we just recently "nerfed" the shocktroopers ... because people (you) moaned about them being too good vs Ukraine ... now out of the sudden we need the "double-zap" and no "ROT" at all , for TeslaTanks although they are also a russian - faction special ... did you consider Ukraine on this change ?
#9248

you forget that we have to balance more then 2 factions now ... and when you buff certain "faction specific units" then youll most likely unbalance the game ... so im once again the boo-man

@ghost

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

commented Nov 12, 2015

@MicroJOo I think its a fair point you make about existing balance feedback and of Ukraine. I have left my thoughts on your PR. As for Ukraine, I wouldn't mind the demo truck speed slightly increased so that when it is killed, it'll die a cell or two closer to the intended target - thus being a little more cost effective. That said if you think buffing the TT is too soon after nerfing the other russian faction specific unit I have no issues removing that change until we got feedback.

As for the phase however, I have to strongly disagree. If anything I feel the changes I propose strengthen its role of 'sneaking in special units'. The speed buffs allow a player to reduce the potential time of being spotted and to exploit temporary gaps in the enemies defences; you know how fast defences are built. The LoS buff allows you to avoid minor base defences much easier -and as such, detection- and the capacity increase allows you to sneak more special units into a base.

The reason I didn't want to buff the phase's weapon as you hint at is because then it would have too similar a role to the chronotank - hit and run. As you say, they are hard to detect on the battlefield so a good weapon would be OP in the right hands. Their cargo has the ability to cause a lot of damage once deployed, but are visible and fragile - so easily countered.

Really though all this theory-crafting means nothing unless people go and test this stuff. I was however under the impression that a feature freeze did not cover balance so long as a playtest was due before the next release - so that these changes could be tested and if need be, reverted before release. But from what I have read on IRC it appears I am mistaken. I think you had a good idea making a couple 'balance changes maps', so I will try and see if players are willing to play such maps.

@cjshmyr

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Nov 12, 2015

As for the tesla tanks > ukraine bit, I'm cool with a dtrk speed increase to help Ukraine out (or heck, if we are really generous we increase the speed of the parabomb badgers for breaking light forces quicker).

@GrayHatter

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Nov 14, 2015

(or heck, if we are really generous we increase the speed of the parabomb badgers for breaking light forces quicker).

I might actually play Ukraine with that change!

@@ -563,7 +563,7 @@ TTNK:
Armament:
Weapon: TTankZap
LocalOffset: 0,0,213
AttackFrontal:
AttackOmni:

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@obrakmann

obrakmann Nov 14, 2015

Contributor

This doesn't work at all for mobile units. Try ordering the tesla tank to a unit that's further away than its weapon range: it won't move towards the target at all.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@pchote

pchote Nov 14, 2015

Member

Could instead give it AttackTurreted with an invisible ROT: 255 turret instead.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@obrakmann

obrakmann Nov 14, 2015

Contributor

Yes, that works. Will make the ttnks be able to also shoot on the move, though.

Just add this, ROT is 255 already by default:

Turreted:
AttackTurreted:

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@ghost

ghost Nov 15, 2015

Author

Thanks for fixing this; I had the same issue with AttackCharge (which implements AttackOmni) but failed to fix it.

@obrakmann

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Nov 14, 2015

Superseded by #9992.

@obrakmann obrakmann closed this Nov 14, 2015

@obrakmann obrakmann removed this from the Next release milestone Nov 14, 2015

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
8 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.