Let's Talk About RA's Navy Part 2!
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2023 11:23 pm
Recent additions will be added in blue
For those unfamiliar once upon a time I tried to re balance navy to make it more worthwhile. Alas while some testing was done and some things were learned, the game grew and life got in the way. This post is gonna be long so if you just don't want the context your can TL;DR at the bottom where the changelog will be.
Nowadays, RA balance is nearly solidified. While there are little bits of change here and there, there are no significant changes like opportunity fire or stance changes that dramatically reshape the game. What this means is now is the perfect time to look towards the last frontier. Balancing Navy.
I'm sure people are going to have plenty of opinions on the matter and I would like to hear them. That said, I think there needs to be some ground rules and mutual understandings that I'd like to get out of the way. Foremost, this game is based on a game from 1995. Even with modernity injected into it, there are quite large limitations on things that are feasible. There are 3 things I want people to keep in mind: How significant are the changes you're suggesting, How likely is this to be added to/fit the base game, and how much work do these changes require? I ask this because a very obvious answer to the naval dilemma is to vastly expand that part of the game. Be that doing like RA3 with building/eco on water, or just making a bunch more naval units to expand the role, or even adding units that go on water and land. All of those changes could feasibly make naval game play something fun and worthwhile. But the reality is those don't fit into the questions I posed. All of those changes are insanely significant. None of those changes fit into what the base game is. And lastly, all of those changes require new sprites, and coding, and rules which is incredibly difficult.
It may very well be that there is no good way to balance navy that makes it fun without those changes. The point is to work our way up to that rather than jump straight there. I think there is a fair amount of stuff we can try before we get there.
I also think it'd be very helpful to address the problems of navy. Of that I think there's 4 big problems: heavy asymmetry between the two factions, limited units, overall game mechanics, and usefulness. The first two are pretty self explanatory. Overall game mechanics and usefulness are a bit more nuanced. By overall game mechanics I mean ships are limited to water and more than 80% of the game is centered on land. Additionally, ship vs ground, ship vs ship, and ship vs air interactions often leave a lot to be desired. In RA95 cruisers were dangerous. They obliterated everything on the ground. In ORA they're anything but. Ship vs ship was never that exciting in the original and ORA did little to improve that. Ship vs air at least has some fun out of the micro with migs/longbows killing ships but that's it.
To be blunt, ships are not useful and most definitely not worth it. There is very little that any naval unit does, that another unit doesn't do better. More often than not ground unit equivalency is cheaper too. 3 Artillery have more punch than a single cruiser does with the exception of armor differences.
I believe maps like duel (water main maps) won't ever work with what we have. They may be fun for the occasional one off play. But in a competitive sense their certainly don't work. They only work in the most casual of senses where players don't want anything too complicated. I also believe that not every map needs a naval component. I do think there is an in between. Navy could be something that shows up every now and then and makes a difference, or impacts the game play by removing one or a few ground options and replacing it with naval options.
I think sullied valleys is a decent example. The map itself wasn't great with the general layout, but it did offer up a limited use for naval that did make it fun to watch sometimes.
My philosophy on how navy should work: Navy is at best going to be in a supporting role like Radar jammers, medics, yaks, longsbows, etc. These types of units can make an impact when built in small numbers and in rare cases huge impacts in large numbers, but they'll never be something like a e1/e3. They alone won't win the game for you. Furthermore, support units shouldn't be necessary every game. In the same vein that not every game reaches higher tech or not every game includes dogs and medics, not every game should include navy, even if it is an option. With that in mind maps have to be designed in way that allows navy to act in a support role.
For a map to be designed in a way that encourages navy, land has to lose something. There has to be a bit of give and take. I think this is possible so long as what you take away can be done via the water it has a shot. Especially if it can be done better by navy. This is what my DT map are going to experiment with.
Another thing I think navy has going for it as a support is while some supports counter other support s(mrj vs migs/longbow, gap gen vs arty, medics vs dog to an extent, or longbows vs other air) navy is a counter to itself. Subs/PT boats/Destroyers are all meant to counter each other. Of course right now they fall short of that, but I think there are changes we can make so that they are better equipped to support land and also better counters to themselves.
The following are any and all changes I've heard towards rebalancing navy. The list is organized in such a way as to work with my 3 main concerns (How significant are the changes you're suggesting, How likely is this to be added to/fit the base game, and how much work do these changes require?).
Best and or easy changes: These changes are generally low significance, have a good chance to be added to the game, and mostly just require yaml changes.
ships own armor type – Giving ships their own armor type (Steel) would allow them to be more effective vs other types while not reducing their ability to deal with navy. A heavy tank wouldn't beat a destroyer in a 1v1 any more, nor would subs fall victims to BH/Yak. But subs and destroyers could still deal with each other without having to change their weapons. While this change is significant and has a lower chance of being added to the base game than others, its work required isn't too bad at all.
msub bigger detection range – This would really help in soviet vs soviet matches in which msubs and subs have the same detection range. At a minimum this allows msubs to skirt around enemy subs and or spot for your own subs. Any sort of micro/positioning dynamic we can create in naval battles is good in my opinion.
pt boat bigger detection range – similar to the above this gives allies a reason to build something besides destroyers.
destroyer smaller detection range – this coupled with the above change adds further dynamics to allied naval play.
move msub to t2 – this is significant but not in the grand scheme of things. Moving msub to t2 allows soviets a golden reason to go naval early and creates a dynamic where allies would be forced to respond.
increase lst to 10 – further utility in transport.
decrease cost to build spen/nyard – one of the prohibitive things about naval is the 800$ and 1000$ price tags for sub pens and naval yards respectively. Reducing this to be in line with the rax/air would certainly help encourage navy. This coupled with cheaper ships in general may work out well.
increase msub projectile speed – perhaps a bit controversial but I think this further gives reason to go navy as soviets. Right now the Msub missiles are even slower than an arty shot.
increase msub/cruiser damage to none – as above a bit controversial.
defenses can target subs – this is one of the stranger ones but is a compromise between any damage causing subs to surface and subs being completely invisible. Its very hard to regain the control of water if one player has cut off access. This seeks to address that problem.
General stat changes to naval units- things like damage, hp, vision, cost etc. All have lots of room to be refined to in conjunction with other changes. Cheaper Msubs could be good if they don't work at t2, while at the same time maybe subs need to have bigger vision to help support land similar to how air does.
Possible and or moderate changes: These changes start to dive into more elaborate changes and while not outlandish, could have plenty of pushback.
removing torp homing – This is how they behaved in the original which is a plus. It also simplifies micro a little bit. In conjunction with some other changes I could see it working. However, this change would require extensive damage/speed rebalancing.
remove surface on firing – This is less like the original but it is a possibility.
change msub to be more like original – Msubs used to behave more like destroyers, just with more heavy weaponry. This was something I experimented with in my original naval balance but I'd be open to peoples opinion. This is certainly a buff compared to current msub behavior and I could see them being kept and t3 if this was used.
change cruiser damage – Again more like the original. Making cruisers fearsome again could be good, but it does effect team games significantly.
depth charges only – Another return to the original, especially if destroyers got 3 of them. This does add some depth (haha) to naval engagements via fancy micro, but it does cause both allied and soviets to fight subs in close proximity, which may make battles quick and oppressive for misplays.
surface on damage – This coupled with removing torp homing, and other changes to be more like the original makes subs less cloak and dagger. This significantly effects water being camped in a good way I think, but it also changes the way subs can be dealt with in open water/transit.
Spy Plane detects submarines – A simpler change, and kinda hard to explain lore wise but it does help weed out subs lurking about.
Sonar Pulse added to the Naval Yard – similar to the above and also has the advantage of granting a seldom used and seen ability more utility. Perhaps with spy infiltration of radar or tech or something this could be made.
increase cruiser projectile speed – one of the few stat changes I think would be rare to see, I wanted to highlight this on in particular because while both mbsub and cruisers suck against moving targets and this could fix that. However, its also may be fine as is.
Subs can "deploy" and surface to vastly increase their vision - this was something I remembered from Sircake. He had it with a speed nerf too while deployed but I'm not sure that's needed. It was nice that subs could act as decent scouts while submerged and even better scouts, but with the risk of being spotted/killed while surfaced.
Give subs an armor bonus while submerged except against torpedoes/depth charges.- the intent here is to be used in conjunction of subs surfacing on any damage. If that is the case than it's entirely possible that subs are too easy to pick off. Therefore if subs gain armor while underwater (which has a certain logic to it) then it could make them less prone to dying while still making them susceptible to torpedoes/depth charges as well as sustained attacks that keep them surfaced.
Significant changes: This is the last resort I think. These are the changes that heavily change the game, are not likely to make it into the base game, and or require extensive work.
give both sides access to all ships – While this makes everything balanced via removing asymmetry, its also a boring solution and not likely to make into base game.
add sea scorpion – This solves soviets lack of AA on sea but requires new sprites and doesn't “fit” the aspect of a sub pen.
implement passable bridges – This in theory would help naval make inwards to the middle of the map without severely choking land paths. But this requires new bridge work and new code.
add helicarrier, acts like pillbox for vehicles. – This change isn't likely but just one of those far out ideas. What if Vehicles had a VFS? A Vehicle fighting Ship? It does solve some things and I think its interesting but does not fit any of the 3 concerns in the slightest.
add more naval units- This is the second to last resort. We tried conservative stat changes, we tried fancy reworks of existing units. We even tried adding just 1 or two new naval units but none of them panned out. Navy still sucks. Perhaps it just needs a more robust navy to make it better? 6 different units to play with is not enough. We need diversity...
Completely rework the game- The last resort. Hell maybe RA3 did have the perfect balance of navy and land. Maybe all ORA is missing is ore mines dredging up minerals from the ocean floor and floating construction yards. Who knows. At least we can rule out all of the previous attempts.
Give nyard/spen defensive capabilities - this from orb as a way to get defenses on water
TL;DR here are the changes I'm currently experimenting with
Ships own armor type: steel
what this means on weapons vs steel (comparison vs heavy):
Tank damage: 2/3rds (77 from 115)
LT damage: 40 from 48
Artillery/cruiser: 40 from 25
ships: unchanged
gren: unchanged
depth: 75(unchanged)
e3: 90 from 100
mig/longbow unchanged
v2: 55 from 40
telsa tech unchanged
turret: unchanged
yak/BH/pillbox/etc: same as heavy damage
Takeway: Because subs now have armor similar to heavy, rifle damage is ineffective against them. This does however mean things that do more damage to armor now do more damage to subs. Turrets right now kills subs in 1 less shot than before. Ground units dealing with ships in particular are nerfed with the exception of arty/v2 which are buffed.
msub detection range: same as vision 8co from 4co
gunboat detection range: 6co from 4c0
destroyer detection range: 3c0 from 4c0
msub to t2
lst to 10
spen/nyard 500 from 800 and 1000 respectively
spy plane detects submarines
spy infiltrating radar or spen/nyard gives sonar pulse
torp spread slightly less 320 from 426
torp damage to wood less 50 from 75
*** These last changes I intend to add but I need to work out kinks.
destroyers have 3 depth charges.
depth charge Spread increased 256 from 128.
Reload 100 from 60.
Range 6c0 from 5c0
Inaccuracy: 1c0 from 0c128
Gunboat/Destoyer/Cruiser/Msub cannot auto target subs with their primary weapon. depthcharges/torpedos only auto target.
Remove torpedo homing.
Subs surface on any damage. aka how Stanks work in TD
sonar pulse: gives gps icons through fog/shroud like gps for 10 seconds.
For those unfamiliar once upon a time I tried to re balance navy to make it more worthwhile. Alas while some testing was done and some things were learned, the game grew and life got in the way. This post is gonna be long so if you just don't want the context your can TL;DR at the bottom where the changelog will be.
Nowadays, RA balance is nearly solidified. While there are little bits of change here and there, there are no significant changes like opportunity fire or stance changes that dramatically reshape the game. What this means is now is the perfect time to look towards the last frontier. Balancing Navy.
I'm sure people are going to have plenty of opinions on the matter and I would like to hear them. That said, I think there needs to be some ground rules and mutual understandings that I'd like to get out of the way. Foremost, this game is based on a game from 1995. Even with modernity injected into it, there are quite large limitations on things that are feasible. There are 3 things I want people to keep in mind: How significant are the changes you're suggesting, How likely is this to be added to/fit the base game, and how much work do these changes require? I ask this because a very obvious answer to the naval dilemma is to vastly expand that part of the game. Be that doing like RA3 with building/eco on water, or just making a bunch more naval units to expand the role, or even adding units that go on water and land. All of those changes could feasibly make naval game play something fun and worthwhile. But the reality is those don't fit into the questions I posed. All of those changes are insanely significant. None of those changes fit into what the base game is. And lastly, all of those changes require new sprites, and coding, and rules which is incredibly difficult.
It may very well be that there is no good way to balance navy that makes it fun without those changes. The point is to work our way up to that rather than jump straight there. I think there is a fair amount of stuff we can try before we get there.
I also think it'd be very helpful to address the problems of navy. Of that I think there's 4 big problems: heavy asymmetry between the two factions, limited units, overall game mechanics, and usefulness. The first two are pretty self explanatory. Overall game mechanics and usefulness are a bit more nuanced. By overall game mechanics I mean ships are limited to water and more than 80% of the game is centered on land. Additionally, ship vs ground, ship vs ship, and ship vs air interactions often leave a lot to be desired. In RA95 cruisers were dangerous. They obliterated everything on the ground. In ORA they're anything but. Ship vs ship was never that exciting in the original and ORA did little to improve that. Ship vs air at least has some fun out of the micro with migs/longbows killing ships but that's it.
To be blunt, ships are not useful and most definitely not worth it. There is very little that any naval unit does, that another unit doesn't do better. More often than not ground unit equivalency is cheaper too. 3 Artillery have more punch than a single cruiser does with the exception of armor differences.
I believe maps like duel (water main maps) won't ever work with what we have. They may be fun for the occasional one off play. But in a competitive sense their certainly don't work. They only work in the most casual of senses where players don't want anything too complicated. I also believe that not every map needs a naval component. I do think there is an in between. Navy could be something that shows up every now and then and makes a difference, or impacts the game play by removing one or a few ground options and replacing it with naval options.
I think sullied valleys is a decent example. The map itself wasn't great with the general layout, but it did offer up a limited use for naval that did make it fun to watch sometimes.
My philosophy on how navy should work: Navy is at best going to be in a supporting role like Radar jammers, medics, yaks, longsbows, etc. These types of units can make an impact when built in small numbers and in rare cases huge impacts in large numbers, but they'll never be something like a e1/e3. They alone won't win the game for you. Furthermore, support units shouldn't be necessary every game. In the same vein that not every game reaches higher tech or not every game includes dogs and medics, not every game should include navy, even if it is an option. With that in mind maps have to be designed in way that allows navy to act in a support role.
For a map to be designed in a way that encourages navy, land has to lose something. There has to be a bit of give and take. I think this is possible so long as what you take away can be done via the water it has a shot. Especially if it can be done better by navy. This is what my DT map are going to experiment with.
Another thing I think navy has going for it as a support is while some supports counter other support s(mrj vs migs/longbow, gap gen vs arty, medics vs dog to an extent, or longbows vs other air) navy is a counter to itself. Subs/PT boats/Destroyers are all meant to counter each other. Of course right now they fall short of that, but I think there are changes we can make so that they are better equipped to support land and also better counters to themselves.
The following are any and all changes I've heard towards rebalancing navy. The list is organized in such a way as to work with my 3 main concerns (How significant are the changes you're suggesting, How likely is this to be added to/fit the base game, and how much work do these changes require?).
Best and or easy changes: These changes are generally low significance, have a good chance to be added to the game, and mostly just require yaml changes.
ships own armor type – Giving ships their own armor type (Steel) would allow them to be more effective vs other types while not reducing their ability to deal with navy. A heavy tank wouldn't beat a destroyer in a 1v1 any more, nor would subs fall victims to BH/Yak. But subs and destroyers could still deal with each other without having to change their weapons. While this change is significant and has a lower chance of being added to the base game than others, its work required isn't too bad at all.
msub bigger detection range – This would really help in soviet vs soviet matches in which msubs and subs have the same detection range. At a minimum this allows msubs to skirt around enemy subs and or spot for your own subs. Any sort of micro/positioning dynamic we can create in naval battles is good in my opinion.
pt boat bigger detection range – similar to the above this gives allies a reason to build something besides destroyers.
destroyer smaller detection range – this coupled with the above change adds further dynamics to allied naval play.
move msub to t2 – this is significant but not in the grand scheme of things. Moving msub to t2 allows soviets a golden reason to go naval early and creates a dynamic where allies would be forced to respond.
increase lst to 10 – further utility in transport.
decrease cost to build spen/nyard – one of the prohibitive things about naval is the 800$ and 1000$ price tags for sub pens and naval yards respectively. Reducing this to be in line with the rax/air would certainly help encourage navy. This coupled with cheaper ships in general may work out well.
increase msub projectile speed – perhaps a bit controversial but I think this further gives reason to go navy as soviets. Right now the Msub missiles are even slower than an arty shot.
increase msub/cruiser damage to none – as above a bit controversial.
defenses can target subs – this is one of the stranger ones but is a compromise between any damage causing subs to surface and subs being completely invisible. Its very hard to regain the control of water if one player has cut off access. This seeks to address that problem.
General stat changes to naval units- things like damage, hp, vision, cost etc. All have lots of room to be refined to in conjunction with other changes. Cheaper Msubs could be good if they don't work at t2, while at the same time maybe subs need to have bigger vision to help support land similar to how air does.
Possible and or moderate changes: These changes start to dive into more elaborate changes and while not outlandish, could have plenty of pushback.
removing torp homing – This is how they behaved in the original which is a plus. It also simplifies micro a little bit. In conjunction with some other changes I could see it working. However, this change would require extensive damage/speed rebalancing.
remove surface on firing – This is less like the original but it is a possibility.
change msub to be more like original – Msubs used to behave more like destroyers, just with more heavy weaponry. This was something I experimented with in my original naval balance but I'd be open to peoples opinion. This is certainly a buff compared to current msub behavior and I could see them being kept and t3 if this was used.
change cruiser damage – Again more like the original. Making cruisers fearsome again could be good, but it does effect team games significantly.
depth charges only – Another return to the original, especially if destroyers got 3 of them. This does add some depth (haha) to naval engagements via fancy micro, but it does cause both allied and soviets to fight subs in close proximity, which may make battles quick and oppressive for misplays.
surface on damage – This coupled with removing torp homing, and other changes to be more like the original makes subs less cloak and dagger. This significantly effects water being camped in a good way I think, but it also changes the way subs can be dealt with in open water/transit.
Spy Plane detects submarines – A simpler change, and kinda hard to explain lore wise but it does help weed out subs lurking about.
Sonar Pulse added to the Naval Yard – similar to the above and also has the advantage of granting a seldom used and seen ability more utility. Perhaps with spy infiltration of radar or tech or something this could be made.
increase cruiser projectile speed – one of the few stat changes I think would be rare to see, I wanted to highlight this on in particular because while both mbsub and cruisers suck against moving targets and this could fix that. However, its also may be fine as is.
Subs can "deploy" and surface to vastly increase their vision - this was something I remembered from Sircake. He had it with a speed nerf too while deployed but I'm not sure that's needed. It was nice that subs could act as decent scouts while submerged and even better scouts, but with the risk of being spotted/killed while surfaced.
Give subs an armor bonus while submerged except against torpedoes/depth charges.- the intent here is to be used in conjunction of subs surfacing on any damage. If that is the case than it's entirely possible that subs are too easy to pick off. Therefore if subs gain armor while underwater (which has a certain logic to it) then it could make them less prone to dying while still making them susceptible to torpedoes/depth charges as well as sustained attacks that keep them surfaced.
Significant changes: This is the last resort I think. These are the changes that heavily change the game, are not likely to make it into the base game, and or require extensive work.
give both sides access to all ships – While this makes everything balanced via removing asymmetry, its also a boring solution and not likely to make into base game.
add sea scorpion – This solves soviets lack of AA on sea but requires new sprites and doesn't “fit” the aspect of a sub pen.
implement passable bridges – This in theory would help naval make inwards to the middle of the map without severely choking land paths. But this requires new bridge work and new code.
add helicarrier, acts like pillbox for vehicles. – This change isn't likely but just one of those far out ideas. What if Vehicles had a VFS? A Vehicle fighting Ship? It does solve some things and I think its interesting but does not fit any of the 3 concerns in the slightest.
add more naval units- This is the second to last resort. We tried conservative stat changes, we tried fancy reworks of existing units. We even tried adding just 1 or two new naval units but none of them panned out. Navy still sucks. Perhaps it just needs a more robust navy to make it better? 6 different units to play with is not enough. We need diversity...
Completely rework the game- The last resort. Hell maybe RA3 did have the perfect balance of navy and land. Maybe all ORA is missing is ore mines dredging up minerals from the ocean floor and floating construction yards. Who knows. At least we can rule out all of the previous attempts.
Give nyard/spen defensive capabilities - this from orb as a way to get defenses on water
TL;DR here are the changes I'm currently experimenting with
Ships own armor type: steel
what this means on weapons vs steel (comparison vs heavy):
Tank damage: 2/3rds (77 from 115)
LT damage: 40 from 48
Artillery/cruiser: 40 from 25
ships: unchanged
gren: unchanged
depth: 75(unchanged)
e3: 90 from 100
mig/longbow unchanged
v2: 55 from 40
telsa tech unchanged
turret: unchanged
yak/BH/pillbox/etc: same as heavy damage
Takeway: Because subs now have armor similar to heavy, rifle damage is ineffective against them. This does however mean things that do more damage to armor now do more damage to subs. Turrets right now kills subs in 1 less shot than before. Ground units dealing with ships in particular are nerfed with the exception of arty/v2 which are buffed.
msub detection range: same as vision 8co from 4co
gunboat detection range: 6co from 4c0
destroyer detection range: 3c0 from 4c0
msub to t2
lst to 10
spen/nyard 500 from 800 and 1000 respectively
spy plane detects submarines
spy infiltrating radar or spen/nyard gives sonar pulse
torp spread slightly less 320 from 426
torp damage to wood less 50 from 75
*** These last changes I intend to add but I need to work out kinks.
destroyers have 3 depth charges.
depth charge Spread increased 256 from 128.
Reload 100 from 60.
Range 6c0 from 5c0
Inaccuracy: 1c0 from 0c128
Gunboat/Destoyer/Cruiser/Msub cannot auto target subs with their primary weapon. depthcharges/torpedos only auto target.
Remove torpedo homing.
Subs surface on any damage. aka how Stanks work in TD
sonar pulse: gives gps icons through fog/shroud like gps for 10 seconds.