Ideas for better game balancing.

Discussion and feedback for Red Alert mod. Vox populi.

Discussion about the game and its default mods.
User avatar
squirrel
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2015 4:54 am
Location: Tree

Ideas for better game balancing.

Post by squirrel » Tue May 12, 2015 6:15 am

Hello OpenRA community, developers, artists and squirrels friends in battle.

This is a new topic with some ideas about better game balancing (for RA mod), and the possiblities of adding more exotic and diverse gameplay style with the Allies and Soviet subfactions

The next points are purely based on my opinion, all feedback and new ideas are welcome. We should gather the best ones and hope for the best developing of the game
  • Hijackers need a speed buff and the ability to camo when they stand still (and only when they are standing, like the removed sniper unit) It´s an idea taken from the GLA Hijacker unit. Also making them uncrushable too should work for a more effective use of this unit
  • Gunboats need a slight buff in their damage, or maybe make them more effective against infantry. As Allies have more advantage when they "storm a shore", Gunboats should make the job against rocketsoldiers.
  • If you have noticed, the Allied Destroyer and Gunboat apart from shooting their primary attack weapon, they also launch a grenade -or something like that- when they are very close and only facing against a submarine unit . We need to buff the speed of that grenade, it´s too slow.
  • The Shock Trooper unit must be uncrushable, just like the hijacker. It was made like this in original Red Alert: Counterstrike, so now it has a more useful passive tool, and would work different from flamethrowers combo.
  • Radar Jammer unit should have the option to disable (jam) the stealth detecting ability from all defensive buildings too (tesla coil, turrets, AA, radar, etc), but with a nerfed Line of Action of this ability
  • Buff Flak Truck´s armor against artillery fire
  • Grenadier´s attack should be buffed to a higher speed of throwing attack, their throwing is too slow. The chance of exploding after dying should be 50%
  • Germany´s Super Chronosphere should have two possible nerfs: or decreasing chrono capacity to 9 units (from 5 being the normal chrono) or increasing the timer for 2 minutes.
  • MiG´s should have a major buff, having the ability to air combat (air to air missiles) and not only air to ground.
  • YAKs should have a buff in their type of attack, making them have a splash damage (like original Red Alert), making them more effective against large groups of infantry
  • The MCV should have a 50 seconds building time.

Murto the Ray
Posts: 486
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 4:34 pm

Re: Ideas for better game balancing.

Post by Murto the Ray » Tue May 12, 2015 8:32 am

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes or buff the spread of the damage
4. I'm not quite sure why since most vehicles will die before they reach a group of shock troopers but if that's what a lot of people are requesting then ok.
5. That's quite a cool idea however what range would this be at? the range needed to scramble a radar?
6. Ok, im not for or against this; go for it.
7. See attached image
8. I would prefer a timer increase to 3 or 4 mins
9. Yes
10. Yes
11. 40 seconds; 50 is just too long. If this is to try and prevent people from base walking then just building more war factories before doing so will cancel this out.
Attachments
Grenadier_Explodes.png
Grenadier_Explodes.png (1.61 KiB) Viewed 3923 times

PersianImmortal
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:04 am

Post by PersianImmortal » Tue May 12, 2015 12:51 pm

I agree that hijackers are trash. They do need a speed buff

The super chrono should have a 3 minute timer. Not 4. At four I'll just go with another allied faction and I'm sure most others would to.

I agree that shock troopers should be uncrushable.

Air to Air migs are what I agree on the most. This is an idea I've pushed for a long time and I feel that the way the meta has evolved has made the news now for them greater than ever. They're the ideal counter to the allied strat of using hinds to be spotters for their arty. As of now very few people build MiGs because yaks are cheaper and more effective against Arties.
But if we do air to air migs, the longbow will need a speed and damage buff because the mig will outclass it in everyway.

I disagree about the mcv build time. 50 seconds is too extreme. Increase it to maybe 35-40 seconds at the most.

winftw
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 10:24 am

Post by winftw » Tue May 12, 2015 2:28 pm

1. Yes.
2, 3. No. Gunboats aren't supposed to be the main combat units. This is how you should use them: Run a gunboat past the soviet navy, watch 15 torpedoes get shot and missed and then go destroy the submarines while they're on their long reload cooldown. Allied navy doesn't need to be even more overpowered.
4. No. I think shocks are already very good and don't need more buffs.
5. Whatever. How do you plan on keeping a radar jammer alive when you park it next to a hostile tesla coil or a turret? :lol:
6. Yes.
7. Whatever. A succesful grenadier attack relies on there not being enemy units nearby to begin with and grenadiers are also typically used to do sneak attacks vs refineries, power plants and other buildings so the grenade speed and explode chance is irrelevant.
8. Yes. I prefer the 9-unit limit.
9. Yes. Air-to-air migs could be the naval anti-air soviet currently don't have. Also mig's 70 hp seems very low (yak has 60 hp) considering the high cost of $2000. Would be nice if mig was a flying tank capable of taking out AA turrets so there would be some variation to this all-aircraft-die-instantly scheme we currently have. Building an AA gun is faster than reloading a MIG so it wouldn't be unbalanced at all. I would buff MIG armor so it can tank some AA fire, buff it's weapon so it doesn't need multiple passes to destroy things (click spam sucks and is painful) and also reduce ammo capacity to compensate for increased weapon damage.
10. Yes

User avatar
JOo
Posts: 510
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 8:12 pm

Post by JOo » Tue May 12, 2015 3:05 pm

i also agree with the hijacker needing a speed buff ... thats fine for me
but if you want camo ability ... and or none crushable ... then we should make him more expensive ...
hijacker with "camo" "vehicle steal" speed buff" and "none crushable" for 500$ ... sounds ridiculous ... and im not talking about "make him +50$ more ... im talking about +200-300

Flak Trucks dont need another buff ... they are cheap , with high range ... you can curtain them ... they auto target really quick ... and the damage just recently got buffed ...
they are fine for the first vehicles soviet can produce ...
you want a flak truck buff ? then buff the light tank too !

I dont like Migs having AA capability ... longbows are allready slower and do less damage then migs ... they dont even reach a mig when its not just idling in circles
and Flak Trucks allready doing a great job keeping "Hinds" at distance ... players use them a lot in the new release , with success
so , tell me ... why do you want AA capability for Migs then ? .... if you do so , then we could remove the Flak Trucks .. which is a custom unit anyway... then im fine with it


mcv buildtime up to 50 seconds is too much ... should start from adding +10-15 seconds to it ... and then see how this turns out on a release ... im not a fan of forcing the players on hardcore balance changes ... especially when its about something important like "expansion"


other then that ... im fine with the suggestions

User avatar
squirrel
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2015 4:54 am
Location: Tree

Post by squirrel » Tue May 12, 2015 4:43 pm

Looks like we got a hijacker stuff... I knew it was -almost- unusable unit, needs buff ASAP... and of course it would have an increased price, it´s too cheap right now... I would go for 800$

--- feedback ---

5. That's quite a cool idea however what range would this be at? the range needed to scramble a radar?

No, nerfed AoE as I said it, I think this would encourage more sneaky tactics with England

5. Whatever. How do you plan on keeping a radar jammer alive when you park it next to a hostile tesla coil or a turret?

Never send him alone, just park outside their base... and send your England friend with phase transport and british spies and GG :eek:


3. No. Gunboats aren't supposed to be the main combat units. This is how you should use them: Run a gunboat past the soviet navy, watch 15 torpedoes get shot and missed and then go destroy the submarines while they're on their long reload cooldown. Allied navy doesn't need to be even more overpowered.

But soviet subs, with a good micromanagement, are capable of taking out the allied navy, gunboats effectivity against infantry doesn´t affect naval battles, just storming the shores... and all we know that´s the main trick of allied navy, their ability of water-to-ground attack.

....
MCV at 40 seconds, ok


Thanks for all the feedback, feel free to add your own suggestions, 500 minds work better

PS: Longbows will become pretty shitty if MiG´s go AA... but I don´t have a good idea for that issue

winftw
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 10:24 am

Post by winftw » Tue May 12, 2015 6:10 pm

Fair points about longbow. Its another shitty unit that needs a buff. Cost a lot and can't kill tanyas/spies/engineers/artillery like hinds can. (Same issue with mig and yak really. Yak is better at everything).

Maybe buff damage and speed for longbow?
JOo wrote:
so , tell me ... why do you want AA capability for Migs then ? .... if you do so , then we could remove the Flak Trucks .. which is a custom unit anyway... then im fine with it
Soviet have no naval anti-air. Even though soviet can get naval control early they will eventually lose it because submarines can't deal with hind+boat (+arty). And once allied gain naval control they can get destroyers+battleships and just win. Even if allied don't get a navy the soviet still don't gain much from having naval control because a couple of hinds can prevent missile subs from doing anything.

Another solution to uncripple the soviet navy would be to make submarines a lot more resilient vs hind/longbow.

Also: I've definitely seen games where soviet navy didn't totally suck. It depends a lot on the map. On maps with only small lakes and many patches of land the naval combat is quite balanced because land units get to join the fight as well.

User avatar
JOo
Posts: 510
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 8:12 pm

Post by JOo » Tue May 12, 2015 7:52 pm

everyone is aware of the fact that soviets cant defend against air-units on the sea ... but this doesnt mean particular that we have to fix the problem by adding AA-capabillity to Migs

in the real ww2 the subs did have "AA" weapons mounted ... for example :

Image


so theres that ...

i have no idea how this would look like ... all im trying to say is , theres more then 1 way to fix the naval stuff

User avatar
r34ch
Posts: 137
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2015 2:02 pm

Post by r34ch » Tue May 12, 2015 7:52 pm

IMHO, rather than simply pointing out units that are underpowered (and ignoring those that are OP), I would prefer to see units balanced directly to their respective tiered and type equivalents.

If you balance tier for tier, type for type, you see exactly what tiers and types are missing equivalents (counter to mammoths+tesla tanks, soviet naval AA), rather than buffing lower tiered units to try and fill a missing role.

It could make the game more balanced and enjoyable for both sides at every stage of a match - and we would simply see more units being used than currently are. I would love to see rangers equal to flaks, artys to V2s, hinds to yaks, meds to heavies etc etc. I have a feeling some units may have to do a swap (...mammoths) but balance and fun surely beats the horrendous original WW balancing.

In this respect, I think Tiberian Dawn has pretty much nailed it.

Murto the Ray
Posts: 486
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 4:34 pm

Post by Murto the Ray » Tue May 12, 2015 8:31 pm

r34ch wrote: IMHO, rather than simply pointing out units that are underpowered (and ignoring those that are OP), I would prefer to see units balanced directly to their respective tiered and type equivalents.

If you balance tier for tier, type for type, you see exactly what tiers and types are missing equivalents (counter to mammoths+tesla tanks, soviet naval AA), rather than buffing lower tiered units to try and fill a missing role.

It could make the game more balanced and enjoyable for both sides at every stage of a match - and we would simply see more units being used than currently are. I would love to see rangers equal to flaks, artys to V2s, hinds to yaks, meds to heavies etc etc. I have a feeling some units may have to do a swap (...mammoths) but balance and fun surely beats the horrendous original WW balancing.

In this respect, I think Tiberian Dawn has pretty much nailed it.
Agreed, i dont think balancing should be tailored towards any individual units so that they alone are used more but instead the game should be balanced so that all units have a use such that you will see a wide diversity of strategies online using a wide diversity of unitsrather than players exploiting a unit that appears to be OP en masse.

User avatar
raymundo
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 10:39 am

Post by raymundo » Tue May 12, 2015 8:32 pm

Great discussion. I agree with somethings, and believe the game could be balanced better. I feel the game has improved since last release in terms of balance.

Hijackers: Yes these currently aren't worth using. Simply add speed to them (grenadier speed). No camo ability.

Gunboat: I said in another thread it would be nice to see gunboats get the depth charges to attack subs, they are on same tier and would be able to contend against each other.

AA sub: Give this unit to soviets, it would only be able to attack air units with a flak/ allied aa kind of attack. I imagine it being available with the radar dome. Each side will now have equal amount of naval units.

Shock troopers: These should not be crushable. As of this may release they received a huge upgrade, and some feel they are OP. I am soviet player and love to use them, but since they are so strong counters must be available, one of them being to crush with vehicles. If you make them uncrushable their damage would need to be reduced a bit, possibly 10-20%.They can already kill a couple of tanks before they even can be crushed.

Radar jammer: I was under the impression buildings did not have steal detecting abilities, and the only way to automatically detect stealth was dogs. If thats the case, this would be a cool ability because it is hard to get that close and the pay off would be nice. This is a very useful unit that is often not used (FTI: It can deflect attacks from destroyers, rocketeers, migs, SAM sites, mammoth rockets [not tank fire], and anything i didn't mention that shoots those types of rockets).
-What if this unit also had a global cooldown, global meaning all units use the charge which lasts 20 seconds and resets in 3 minutes, which would then divert aircraft into uncontrollable directions while they fly over the radar jammers.

Flak trucks: I already find these useful and don't require a armor buff, they are cheap and fast to build.

Grenadier: Give this unit to allies as they don't really have a rushing unit and I like the idea of them having a 50% chance to explode on death.

Super Chrono: If sending 5 units, the cooldown will be the regular 2 minutes, 6+ units cooldown will be extended to 4 minutes. This isn't an essential change, I haven't really found this ability to be too overpowered yet. 9 unit limit sounds reasonable.

Migs: Health increase sounds appropriate, maybe +20?

Yaks: It would be nice if these units could function better when using attack move, depending on how much ammo it has it would keep firing in a straight line on units in that row.

MCV: 40 second build time maybe.

British Spy: Should steal 55-60% of money, cut power for 25 seconds.

Mobile Gap Generator: Increase gap by 1 cell all around.

PersianImmortal
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:04 am

Post by PersianImmortal » Wed May 13, 2015 12:16 am

JOo wrote: everyone is aware of the fact that soviets cant defend against air-units on the sea ... but this doesnt mean particular that we have to fix the problem by adding AA-capabillity to Migs

in the real ww2 the subs did have "AA" weapons mounted ... for example :

Image


so theres that ...

i have no idea how this would look like ... all im trying to say is , theres more then 1 way to fix the naval stuff
I'm fine with removing the flak truck. Just buff Sam Site's range to be as a good as AAs and go ahead and remove it.

User avatar
raymundo
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 10:39 am

Post by raymundo » Wed May 13, 2015 3:05 am

PersianImmortal wrote: I'm fine with removing the flak truck. Just buff Sam Site's range to be as a good as AAs and go ahead and remove it.
Don't make me have a flak attack! One of my favorite units!

User avatar
Prince Blueblood
Posts: 169
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 6:32 am
Location: Kudus

Post by Prince Blueblood » Wed May 13, 2015 3:43 am

Aye, Flak Truck is essential for early game scouting and infantry harassment...

If anything, I suggest making Flak Truck attacks more effective against vehicles and tanks, so they can actually contribute against light tanks
OpenRA Nicks :
- Everything with "Blueblood" inside
- Yuelang (when I speak Chinese, literally)

My Ping might be Red... blame distance and my shitty connection due to which country I lived in...

User avatar
raymundo
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 10:39 am

Post by raymundo » Wed May 13, 2015 3:47 am

I feel flak is a unit that can be left as is, it doesn't have to contend with light tank, i enjoy that they have different purposes.

Post Reply