Asset Balance & singleplayer question

[jerebaldo1]

Hey there everyone, I've been periodically lurking around this site ever since BCM was in development. I've watched in fascination how both BCM and this title have matured from start to finish. For sure there's some divine lovin going into each BC product. UC will surely be my first bc buy.

I'm curious though as to how harmoniously the assets will balance out, including infantry combat. Personally, I consider myself a freakish perfectionist when it comes to game balance because I find balance the most important bastions of gameplay longevity. Since muliplayer will be widespread with this game, I'm hoping there will be next to no exploits.

The singleplayer question regards the various intrigues that ppl hve discovered i the BCM galaxy like unknown/ghost ships and other wierd anomalies. I just LOVE such things because I'm then type that likes to root out these things and discover them. About how many of these anomalies are going to show up in UC?

[Bandus]

How many? Hrm. There will be EXACTLY 42 of these types of anomalies in the final product of UC. The answer is 42.

[jerebaldo1]

Uhh oh, I better check out before the forum snobs come down on me for asking 2 perfectly legitimate questions!!! Is there anyone (hopefully SC) that can just answer the damn questions? It's not that hard Bandus, u can do it!

[Charles Lindsey]

(Looks down nose) We are not snobs. Just elitists.

Derek has worked on "balance" for a long time but I'm not sure if it's balanced the way YOU think it should be balanced. An unarmed transport cannot take on a Stormcarrier. No balance there. A lone marine cannot take out a starbase. No balance there. But with careful utilization of assets you should have fun.

If by anomaly you mean things listed in the VCF as fixed then it is almost a useless question. To count them Derek would have to know about them. If Derek knows about them he fixes them rendering it no longer an anomoly then the count becomes moot.

Hope that helps some.

[jerebaldo1]

Thank you, thank you for the earnest reply; I was beginning to lose hope for honest discussions. My definition of balance is an economic one. An lower monetary and time expenditure will lose to a higher monetary and time expenditure, unless the unit has equal added weakness to balance out the added strength. Skill is a control that isn't factored in here, as it of course is and should be independent from the hardware utilized by the skill.

Now what I refer to is say a fighter armed with 2 titanic torpedoes. Those torps are rather costly, and together they will decently damage a battlecruiser. But the fighter has no weapons to combat other fighters or fast moving corvettes expect or its laser beam. But I assume that having fighter to fighter missiles will make the fight pretty darned one way.

I must tell you that I just started playing the desert combat extended mod for BF 1942. The balance smells of rotten uterus. Stinger missiles are good for one thing: killing helos and planes. They suck my butt to that end. For hours on end I battled the same helo pilot coming on over me to rocket pod my ass into oblivion. Oh, same fate with designated AA vehicles. Sooo agravating. No skill or ping differential, especially since even rom cover I couldn't hit the helo or plane, and after the first shot it would figure out where I was and the pilot would unload on me.

Oh, and infantry vs vehicles is a joke as the designated AT soldier takes 3 closeranged cumbersome shots to kill the tank. And tanks are good at pointblank and long ranges too; they are superweapons. Infantry suck, end of story. No fun for a lover of shoulder mounted weapons like myself. Heh, and I've seen other players ganked all over the place when they try to run AT/AA. Thats why everyone teamkills for the good vehicles. It's madness, its retardation.

But of course in UC we have an economics model. So if it takes 2 skilled bazooka toting soldiers to kill a tank, so be it if and only if it costs a lot more than 3 or 4 bazooka soldiers to kill a tank, since tanks have more overall worth than Bazookas and because you wanna penalize the tank player economically for going up against strategically equiped bazooka men. Thats my essay on game balance right there.

What I meant by anomolies were unique and strange galactic sightings, perhaps easter eggs if you will, but that fit into the bc mythos. I read a post a long time ago about some guy who found a ship or fighter that when targeted it showed as unknown race and unknown make. They arent bugs, just unique thing to discover in the galaxy that SC and the world builder have artfully crafted.

[Eclipse]

quote:

---

Originally posted by frumple2:

Thank you, thank you for the earnest reply; I was beginning to lose hope for honest discussions. My definition of balance is an economic one. An lower monetary and time expenditure will lose to a higher monetary and time expenditure, unless the unit has equal added weakness to balance out the added strength. Skill is a control that isn't factored in here, as it of course is and should be independent from the hardware utilized by the skill.

Now what I refer to is say a fighter armed with 2 titanic torpedoes. Those torps are rather costly, and together they will decently damage a battlecruiser. But the fighter has no weapons to combat other fighters or fast moving corvettes expect or its laser beam. But I assume that having fighter to fighter missiles will make the fight pretty darned one way.

I must tell you that I just started playing the desert combat extended mod for BF 1942. The balance smells of rotten uterus. Stinger missiles are good for one thing: killing helos and planes. They suck my butt to that end. For hours on end I battled the same helo pilot coming on over me to rocket pod my ass into oblivion. Oh, same fate with designated AA vehicles. Sooo agravating. No skill or ping differential, especially since even rom cover I couldn't hit the helo or plane, and after the first shot it would figure out where I was and the pilot would unload on me.

Oh, and infantry vs vehicles is a joke as the designated AT soldier takes 3 closeranged cumbersome shots to kill the tank. And tanks are good at pointblank and long ranges too; they are superweapons. Infantry suck, end of story. No fun for a lover of shoulder mounted weapons like myself. Heh, and I've seen other players ganked all over the place when they try to run AT/AA. Thats why everyone teamkills for the good vehicles. It's madness, its retardation.

But of course in UC we have an economics model. So if it takes 2 skilled bazooka toting soldiers to kill a tank, so be it if and only if it costs a lot more than 3 or 4 bazooka soldiers to kill a tank, since tanks have more overall worth than Bazookas and because you wanna penalize the tank player economically for going up against strategically equiped bazooka men. Thats my essay on game balance right there.

What I meant by anomolies were unique and strange galactic sightings, perhaps easter eggs if you will, but that fit into the bc mythos. I read a post a long time ago about some guy who found a ship or fighter that when targeted it showed as unknown race and unknown make. They arent bugs, just unique thing to discover in the galaxy that SC and the world builder have artfully crafted.

---

to steal a word from Derek... Wot?

[Supreme Cmdr]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eclipse:

to steal a word from Derek... Wot?

---

LOL!!! Now you know why I'm not even going to bother getting involved in this one.

[jerebaldo1]

Awright, I get it. That post was too long and disorganized. My original question was: are the assets balanced? Has time been taken to make sure that there aren't any assets/weapons that are overpowered for the cost it takes to get them? Cuz this is important for multiplayer.

[Bandus]

Ahhhh, now I see a clear question. That is what /I/ was waiting for. I agree that balance is definetly important in any multiplayer game. Rest assured that every effort will be made to ensure the balance that you speak of.

And for the record. yes, that was hard.

[Charles Lindsey]

quote:

---

An lower monetary and time expenditure will lose to a higher monetary and time expenditure, unless the unit has equal added weakness to balance out the added strength.

---

quote:

---

So if it takes 2 skilled bazooka toting soldiers to kill a tank, so be it if and only if it costs a lot more than 3 or 4 bazooka soldiers to kill a tank, since tanks have more overall worth than Bazookas and because you wanna penalize the tank player economically for going up against strategically equiped bazooka men. Thats my essay on game balance right there.

---

Ummm, nope. Not necessarily. There are a variety of missles. Each with it's own "skill level" if you will and damage level. The cheapest, dumbest, weakest missle is not, say, 10 times cheaper than the most expensive, smartest, strongest missile. Ten of the cheapies do not equal one of the fancies.

There are a variety of fighters and capital ships as well. Each has its own strengths and weaknesses (speed; pitch, roll, yaw; turret sweet spot; number of turrets; etc.) and they do not necessarily offset each other in any way shape or form. Go read (I'm sure you have but for the benefit of others) the Favorite ship thread in the fun stuff forum. Some people like the faster ship even though it is a bit weaker. Some people like those lumbering slugs because of the firepower.

Pilots and marines start out at a skill level (intelligence factor) and learn and grow as they do stuff. The AG (auto generated) pilots also have certain skill levels. You might come up against an Ace in the best fighter and just not be abel to kill him. But unlike your BF 1942 scenario you described there is no secret to killing him. You don't have to have the one super best missile there is and nothing else will do.

There is an overall balance to the game but it's not this ship equals three of those or it takes exactly ten or more marines to kill that missile launcher but nine just won't do sort of thing.

Skill is a factor. You do have to know how to use that particular ship you have chosen and strategize. Going in hell bent for leather guns a'blazin' often won't do.

Hope that helps.

As for Easter eggs only Derek knows.

[Epsilon 5]

balancing issues are some of the worst headaches any game developper will get. Not only it's HARD to do a good balance, but players will whine and whine over and over again. Planetside is getting a HUGE balance pass very soon (they are still working on creating a feasible patch for the test server AFAIK), but I'm sure people will keep whining over again after.

Balance is not exclusively about keeping 2 ships/weapons at equal levels, but to have a plausible ratio of how many X will be needed to destroy that other thing. A single marine may not be able to take on a starbase, but if 10 can do it, that's too easy.

Similar situation in planetside as the anti-vehicle weapon of one of the factions (an energy beam cannon, the lancer) is currently more effective at sniping infantry than the sniper rifle itself ...

And it's even worse if a weapon designed for some task is innefective at it.

Derek has, as i have seen so far, changed the balance on 1 thing : spacestations. They went from ridiculously easy to destroy to plain impossible (i have sent fleets of cruisers and carriers to stations (20+ ships) and they all blew up before getting in firing range) unless you cloak - in which case it stays ridiculously easy. So balance is far from achieved.

[jerebaldo1]

Thanks for the replies you guys, I appreciate a good discussion. Yeah, I agree that it can pretty hard to come up with a good balance algorithm without resorting to Einstein busting calculus. I for one love going into data files and trying to balance a game. Heh, if I could I'd make a living doing it!

[jerebaldo1]

Ohhh yes, I am a believer of that! Cant wait to jump all over the demo

[XLurker]

Greetings.

I have been watching the progress of Battlecruiser:Generations with some interest and was very surprised when I found out that it has been renamed.

I tried to put some information together about how UC compares with BC:Millenium but there are still some questions open.

And I suppose that this is the right forum and the right thread to ask them .

Here are some small questions:

I suppose there are still OTS missiles ,right?

And if there are (hopefully) will they create an impressive explosion if they detonate?

Is it still planned to be possible to capture enemy bases?

And if it is then how is it going to work?

What weapons will submarines be capable of using?

What exactly has been simplified in UC?

[Supreme Cmdr]

quote:

---

Originally posted by XLurker:

Greetings.

Here are some small questions:

I suppose there are still OTS missiles ,right?

And if there are (hopefully) will they create an impressive explosion if they detonate?

Is it still planned to be possible to capture enemy bases?

And if it is then how is it going to work?

What weapons will submarines be capable of using?

What exactly has been simplified in UC?

---

1. Yes
   
2. They work the same way they do now
   
3. No; that feature didn't make the cut
   
4. See previous
   
5. APN
   
6. You'll have to wait for the game to find out
   

[Cruis.In]

quote:

---

I was beginning to lose hope for honest discussions

---

aren't you going just a bit overboard? you appear to be someone whose head is filled with nonsense about these forums and the people who frequent them.

a question like how many things like the galaxian probes will be in the game is a question no one here can answer. and the person who can probably won't divulge and exact number.

[Kalshion]

I speak for myself here, not for my fleet

But if I where you, I would watch what I say here on this board, some of these people where answering your questions that best THEY knew how, insulting them doesn't help

As for INF combat

I don't expect my marines to take out a tank, I expect them to harass the tank while our fly boys come in and clear the tank of existense

It all comes down to skill.. a skilled marine will be able to take out a tank

A skilled Marine Bazooka Officer will be able to take out a tank by himself

Anyone skilled enough in a certain weapon will know how its used, what to hit for, and when to use it

For example, in reality, an infintry men can take out an entire tank crew with only ONE granade

is that unbalanced? not really.. want to know why? cause the inf caught the crew off guard, allowing him to toss a nade into the tank and take out the crew

NOW in UC you can't do that as far as I know but you can harass the tank, a tank is not invincible against marine weapons

EF marines last I checked had a sniper rifle

IF marines last I checked had a rocket launcher

SF marines last I checked had a laser rifle (that what I call it SC)

IF! Elite Force marines and Inf Marines work together there is NOTHING they can't do

Again like I said.. it all comes down to skill but yes Ep is right

Players will continue to whine and whine and whine about this and that and say its unfair for this and unfair for that.. it'll never stop

Now.. a suggestion.. treat the members here a little more respect

[Grizzle]

I don't think balance needs to be worried about at all. This is a game with all levels of weapons, vehicles, AI skill levels etc. It's going to come down to skill and TACTICS in MP. Sure there will be the best weapons/configs to use...but that happens in ALL MP games.

A noob that outfits himself with all the best gear is not guaranteed a win against an experienced player with lesser gear. Conversely, a noob with inferior gear can still take out a vet with the best gear if it's played right.

Besides...most of your forces are AI (that grow with exp) so how much control do you really have over how well they perform?

If you're good at strategizing, managing your crew and issuing orders you will be good at UC.

[Extinct_Reptilia]

I've been noticing marines armed with assualt rifles in some of these vehicles as passengers Such as this one

Does anyone know if the player wille be able to fire from this spot while the vehicle is moving? What view will the player have, the FP HUD or the vehilce HUD when in this passenger position?

[Cruis.In]

i think that the game plays well as it is in terms of balancing, though I have not had a chance to try multiplayer in bcmg. however, that being said, when UC comes along and multiplayer is more rampant or popular than it was with bcmg, then I'm guessing more balance issues will show up or made more prominent, and they will be corrected.

no better way to balance than by seeing it through multiplayer.

everything that you can do that would seem unfair has some sort of limitation, cloaking, radiation levels as well as fuel levels. hyper jumps (before) can't be done one after the other every second, recharge time is needed.