Ahriman
Tyrant
Please read as: 1.9 BETA Unit balance thoughts.
* * *
So, I've done some more playtesting and I can't help but feel that unit stats still aren't quite "right", given their place in the tech tree.
Here are the main problems as I see them, with some potential solutions. Feedback would be much appreciated by anyone who has played the mod (not just regular posters).
Problems
1. The rate of combat advance between "tiers" doesn't feel quite right. I worry that the gaps between tiers are a bit too large. In particular, a unit specializing in role A does much better at Role B than a unit specializing in role B from the tier below. I'm not sure if thats appropriate.
To change this would require some major reworking, however.
More manageable changes follow.
2. The chemical explosives/rocketry tech line is a bit too strong, and nitrates is a bit too important (and you're too screwed without it).
The missile trooper, supposed to be an anti-air/vehicle specialist, is largely ineffective at its specialist role, but it is too good as a generalist role. It is available early (few tech requirements), and at strength 8 it outclasses previous units.
But it still isn't really tough enough to fend off vehicles very effectively. It can hold off a roller, but even a light scorpion (strength 15) will trounce it.
The final rocket/missile trooper is very ineffective considering how late it comes.
My suggestions:
a) Make the nitrates resource required only for the siege line units, and the grenade trooper, not the rocket/missile trooper units.
b) Change the rocket trooper from strength 4 +50% vs vehicle/mech/hornet/thopter to strength 3 +100% vs vehicle/hornet thopter.
c) Change the missile trooper from strength 8 +50% vs vehicle/hornet/thopter to strength 7 +100% vs vehicle, +50% vs hornet, thopter, mech.
d) Add an extra tech requirement to the Rocketry tech (not sure what).
e) Change the mongoose trooper to +100% vs vehicle, +50% vs hornet/thopter/mech.
The problem with this strategy is that it makes armor piercing promotions and the like less interesting, since they have a relatively smaller impact. Eg: strength 3 +120% vs strength 4+70%.
3. Hornets are still a bit too dominating; they do too much damage, and they are far too effective vs desert units. I think this is because their strength is too high, and because only the suspensor frigate ended up getting an intercept chance.
I suggest:
a) Give suspensor gunship, destroyer, cruiser 20% intercept chances, reduce suspensor frigate to 20% intercept chance. Consider giving them access to the Interception promotions.
b) Reduce firefly strength 10->8. Reduce Wasp strength 8->6, and increase bonus vs hornets to +75%. Reduce Beesting strength 8->7 (leave it at +50% vs hornets). Reduce locust strength 12 to 9. Reduce dragonfly strength 16 to 12. Reduce Cielago strength 16 to 12.
4. Thopters are weak and lack a strong combat role, suspensors are generally better.
Their anti-melee role is weak because they aren't high enough base strength to be competitive vs their similar tier melee units.
I think we should try to make them into surgical raiders; still fairly low strength, but more movement to respond rapidly, and more ability to do hit and run, and some chance to get away.
However, we want to make sure that we avoid exploits where they can move onto land, pillage, and escape again.
a) Remove ability to pillage from all thopter units.
b) Increase base movement rate of all thopters by 1.
c) Add a 15% withdraw chance to all thopter units (currently, the vulture and hawk have 10% already).
d) Increase the Hawk thopter withdraw chance to 25%. So it is a vulture thopter with +1 movement and +10% withdraw.
5. Scorpion units are a bit too dominant. Their base strengths are high enough that with a few promotions, their city penalties are insufficient to stop them being successful city fighters (strength 15 with -20% city attack and combat 1, combat 2 is strength 15 vs cities). And the quad is just a touch too expensive; it costs the same as 3 infantry units, which would often be more effective. This is very sensitive though... if you could build a big army of Ixian quads (or Ordos trikes!) then that would be very powerful indeed, particularly for pillaging-choking AIs.
a) Change the city penalties to -35% city attack/city defense to all vehicle units.
b) Reduce the quad cost from 90 to 80 hammers. Leave the trike at 90 hammers?
6. The lasgun units lack an interesting role. The idea was to try to somehow model the effect of lasguns vs shields, by giving them a bonus vs melee, but this isn't very interesting. I wonder if we should just keep them as city defenders, and give up on having anything special about lasguns.
a) Remove their bonus vs melee units, and their ignores city defenses. Give them +30% city defense.
7. Siege units are too strong, particularly as city attackers. And the AI doesn't use ranged bombardment effectively (and it misses so often that its frustrating to use).
I think we want these units to be for knocking down city defenses, and for collateral damage vs stacks.
a) Remove ranged bombardment from all siege units.
b) Remove city attack bonus from all siege units.
c) Add 20% withdraw chance to all siege units, but disable their ability to get "defensive" withdrawal. So this is a chance to let them survive when suiciding, but without giving the defensive survivability possibility.
d) Change the howitzer somehow. At the moment, it is basically the same as a unit a whole tier higher. Maybe make it strength 9, and give it a first strike?
e) Change missile launcher strength 10 to 11. change assault cannon strength 14 to 15.
* * *
So, I've done some more playtesting and I can't help but feel that unit stats still aren't quite "right", given their place in the tech tree.
Here are the main problems as I see them, with some potential solutions. Feedback would be much appreciated by anyone who has played the mod (not just regular posters).
Problems
1. The rate of combat advance between "tiers" doesn't feel quite right. I worry that the gaps between tiers are a bit too large. In particular, a unit specializing in role A does much better at Role B than a unit specializing in role B from the tier below. I'm not sure if thats appropriate.
To change this would require some major reworking, however.
More manageable changes follow.
2. The chemical explosives/rocketry tech line is a bit too strong, and nitrates is a bit too important (and you're too screwed without it).
The missile trooper, supposed to be an anti-air/vehicle specialist, is largely ineffective at its specialist role, but it is too good as a generalist role. It is available early (few tech requirements), and at strength 8 it outclasses previous units.
But it still isn't really tough enough to fend off vehicles very effectively. It can hold off a roller, but even a light scorpion (strength 15) will trounce it.
The final rocket/missile trooper is very ineffective considering how late it comes.
My suggestions:
a) Make the nitrates resource required only for the siege line units, and the grenade trooper, not the rocket/missile trooper units.
b) Change the rocket trooper from strength 4 +50% vs vehicle/mech/hornet/thopter to strength 3 +100% vs vehicle/hornet thopter.
c) Change the missile trooper from strength 8 +50% vs vehicle/hornet/thopter to strength 7 +100% vs vehicle, +50% vs hornet, thopter, mech.
d) Add an extra tech requirement to the Rocketry tech (not sure what).
e) Change the mongoose trooper to +100% vs vehicle, +50% vs hornet/thopter/mech.
The problem with this strategy is that it makes armor piercing promotions and the like less interesting, since they have a relatively smaller impact. Eg: strength 3 +120% vs strength 4+70%.
3. Hornets are still a bit too dominating; they do too much damage, and they are far too effective vs desert units. I think this is because their strength is too high, and because only the suspensor frigate ended up getting an intercept chance.
I suggest:
a) Give suspensor gunship, destroyer, cruiser 20% intercept chances, reduce suspensor frigate to 20% intercept chance. Consider giving them access to the Interception promotions.
b) Reduce firefly strength 10->8. Reduce Wasp strength 8->6, and increase bonus vs hornets to +75%. Reduce Beesting strength 8->7 (leave it at +50% vs hornets). Reduce locust strength 12 to 9. Reduce dragonfly strength 16 to 12. Reduce Cielago strength 16 to 12.
4. Thopters are weak and lack a strong combat role, suspensors are generally better.
Their anti-melee role is weak because they aren't high enough base strength to be competitive vs their similar tier melee units.
I think we should try to make them into surgical raiders; still fairly low strength, but more movement to respond rapidly, and more ability to do hit and run, and some chance to get away.
However, we want to make sure that we avoid exploits where they can move onto land, pillage, and escape again.
a) Remove ability to pillage from all thopter units.
b) Increase base movement rate of all thopters by 1.
c) Add a 15% withdraw chance to all thopter units (currently, the vulture and hawk have 10% already).
d) Increase the Hawk thopter withdraw chance to 25%. So it is a vulture thopter with +1 movement and +10% withdraw.
5. Scorpion units are a bit too dominant. Their base strengths are high enough that with a few promotions, their city penalties are insufficient to stop them being successful city fighters (strength 15 with -20% city attack and combat 1, combat 2 is strength 15 vs cities). And the quad is just a touch too expensive; it costs the same as 3 infantry units, which would often be more effective. This is very sensitive though... if you could build a big army of Ixian quads (or Ordos trikes!) then that would be very powerful indeed, particularly for pillaging-choking AIs.
a) Change the city penalties to -35% city attack/city defense to all vehicle units.
b) Reduce the quad cost from 90 to 80 hammers. Leave the trike at 90 hammers?
6. The lasgun units lack an interesting role. The idea was to try to somehow model the effect of lasguns vs shields, by giving them a bonus vs melee, but this isn't very interesting. I wonder if we should just keep them as city defenders, and give up on having anything special about lasguns.
a) Remove their bonus vs melee units, and their ignores city defenses. Give them +30% city defense.
7. Siege units are too strong, particularly as city attackers. And the AI doesn't use ranged bombardment effectively (and it misses so often that its frustrating to use).
I think we want these units to be for knocking down city defenses, and for collateral damage vs stacks.
a) Remove ranged bombardment from all siege units.
b) Remove city attack bonus from all siege units.
c) Add 20% withdraw chance to all siege units, but disable their ability to get "defensive" withdrawal. So this is a chance to let them survive when suiciding, but without giving the defensive survivability possibility.
d) Change the howitzer somehow. At the moment, it is basically the same as a unit a whole tier higher. Maybe make it strength 9, and give it a first strike?
e) Change missile launcher strength 10 to 11. change assault cannon strength 14 to 15.
