UFO:Alien Invasion
General => Discussion => Topic started by: tobbe on February 15, 2008, 07:18:30 pm
-
Hi,
some weapons are quite well balanced right now, but i...was interrupted. PHALANX brought me back. ;D
EDIT: ARRGH!! Dont know what happened here, post continued:
EDIT2: I DONT BELIVE IT!! I just sat here for half an hour, editing my post and IT IS GONE THE SECOND TIME. Will try again the next days. Just TOO pissed off right now... >:( >:( >:(
-
.... didn't finish your sentence.
-
Alien abductee. Notify PHALANX.
-
tobbe, try drafting your post in a separate program, like a text editor or something :) Maybe the session is timing out, and you are loosing your login.
.
.
.
And wear the tinfoil hat! ;D
-
EDIT2: I DONT BELIVE IT!! I just sat here for half an hour, editing my post and IT IS GONE THE SECOND TIME. Will try again the next days. Just TOO pissed off right now... >:( >:( >:(
Some UTF 8 characters are not recognized by the forum (like some kind of quote). If one of those is encountered, everything after is just deleted. :(
-
Might want to copy your post to the clipboard before hitting the send button next time, to prevent this from happening.
-
best idea is fix forum, change it from ugly ISO-8859-1 to normal UTF-8
-
I have noticed that M-dashes (like a normal N dash "-" but twice as long) will cause the message to break off.
-
mdash, [l|r]aquo (<< and >> quotes), may be some other symbols.
-
Ok, I start another try, this time I use an editor.
I would like to balance all the weapons in a way, that each has some purpose for the game and therefore can be used. To do this not only for my own personal pleasure, I would like to have some general guidelines, how the weapons are supposed to be balanced. The wiki has some information about some weapons, but I think these informations are partly outdated and incomplete. So I want to gather opinions how the different weapons are balanced against each other withs pros/cons concerning their
Primary factors: Dam/TU, accuracy, Maximum damage, Range, effect vs. armor
Secondary Factors: Ammo, reload, price
I want to have some general guidelines before actually changing the exact weapon values. So if I change lets say the damage of the Bolter rifle, I know that I would have to change the damage for plasma weapons,too, cause plasma weapons are supposed to deliver superior amounts of damage. I try to give some examples:
Close weapons: Right now the only close weapon I use is the SMG and the Flamethrower. All the other close weapons lack the punch and before I use any of them, I rather run for cover. Imho, close weapons should really offer an alternative to primary weapons. So my general guideline suggestion would be:
Close Weapons:
Dam/TU Good: You might want to use them if standing face to face with an enemy
Maximum damage: Low: You will have to hit more often compared to standard weapons
Accuracy: Well they hit.
Range: really only close combat!
This would mean to greatly decrease the weapon range for some weapons. Lets face it: as long I can use my SMG at 45 Meters (that should approximately 30 hexes, if I got that right), there is no need using an assault rifle as 30 hexes covers most of a standard map. I would reduce the effective range of most starting gear to around 15 meters.
Of course this general guideline would have to be extended to each weapon, but I hope I you get the idea.
Alien Weapons:
We all agree on the point that alien weapons should be superior to human weaponry. But they still have to be balanced , so that they do not obsolete all human weaponry, once they are researched.
Idea: Plasma Weapons
Dam/TU: depends on the actual weapon, generally medium
Maximum damage: High
Range: Low
Accuracy: Low
Effect vs. armor: this might be a point to discuss. The way UFO:AI works right now, Plasma weapons are quite effective vs. human armor, but quite ineffective vs. alien armor. Due to the last point I NEVER use them!
Plasma weapons are able to deliver a serious blow, but they need a considerable amount of time to be fired. If you want accurate shots on considerable range, plasma is the wrong way to go. Want to fry your enemy with one shot on close range: Plasma is your friend.
Last point: Which weapons are meant to be a Replacement? Lets take the assault rifle or the MG. Are these weapons are meant to be replaced be simply more efficient weapons (e.g. bolter, laser rifle or heavy laser). Or do we want them to be useful till the endgame. On thing that really bothers me right now is the sniper rifle. There is no actual replacement for this weapon, but e.g. laser rifles are much more accurate than sniper rifles. I would like to see a sniper mode on laser rifles.
edit: i finally managed to post it! :o
-
Shouldn't the Spread affect "close" weapons more than their max range? The SMG may have a max range of 45 but, in my experience at least, it is very inefficient at anything over 5 hexes, as shots fly everywhere except at the target :P
Also, if the aliens fought back via Reaction Fire, the worth of "one shot, one kill" weapons would increase. At the moment, it's quite feasible to shoot something 5 times with the MP, but if that generated 5 reaction attacks it would not be such a great idea.
PS. well done for posting it, finally! :P
-
Shouldn't the Spread affect "close" weapons more than their max range? The SMG may have a max range of 45 but, in my experience at least, it is very inefficient at anything over 5 hexes, as shots fly everywhere except at the target :P
Right now spread works the same way for all weapons. The greater the distance, the more shots will miss. But right now, the spread of SMGs is lesser than the spread of full-auto assault rifles and MGs, while the MG and the Assault Rifle also need much more TUs to fire the full-auto.
I agree to the point, that SMGs become less efficient on medium distances, but than they are efficient enough on at least 10 squares due to their low TU-cost.
The SMG definitely needs most balancing, but before I start to develop specific ideas how to nerf this Uberweapon, I want to gather some general guidelines, where the SMG and all other weapons could fit in.
Example: If we can agree on limiting the range of all close weapons, while allowing them to be efficient in dam/TU, we might only need to restrict the range of the SMG. If we all agree that Standard weapons should be more efficient against armor, it might be a possible tweak to reduce the damage per shot of the SMG and increase the damage per shot of the MG and so on.
Also, if the aliens fought back via Reaction Fire, the worth of "one shot, one kill" weapons would increase. At the moment, it's quite feasible to shoot something 5 times with the MP, but if that generated 5 reaction attacks it would not be such a great idea.
I can only do some work on the current mechanisms. If the aliens use RF more, some new tweaking might be necessary.
-
Well, I would rather improve the Snap Shot of the Assault Rifle, to be honest :D Seems much more appropriate than lowering the max range of the SMG. Having weapons refuse to work just because the target is farther than 15 metres would ruin the suspension of disbelief for me :) Nerf the SMG by having it spray rounds all over the place -- when you are close that doesn't matter, but when you are farther away it certainly does.
Also, lower its ammo capacity: then it's 5-round burst would become more of a handicap. At the moment, it is still 10% of the mag as per other weapons. Make the mag 30 rounds, or even 20, and suddenly the SMG is not so uber -- you need to cart around more ammo, and even spend time reloading! :o ;D
-
First off, in my opinion there should be no max range whatsoever save for weapons like the plasma series which feature dissipating projectiles, where they would make sense. Let spread naturally determine maximum effective ranges rather than arbitrarily posing needless limitations.
Second, while most human weapons should enter obsolescence, those without an alien equivalent should remain viable throughout the game (e.g. grenade/rocket launcher, flamethrower). Further, it would be preferable if human weapons regained viability with additional research (e.g. new ammo types), so as to maximize tactical and gameplay options without sacrificing the centrepiece concept of an evolving arsenal.
Finally, weapons should match their qualitative and quantitative descriptions and properties as realistically as possible, with an overarcing emphasis on balance. From what I gathered from the wiki, the average common denominators and properties of the major weapon categories (there are notable exceptions such as sniper rifles) seems to be as follows:
Plasma:
Damage: High
Accuracy: Low/Medium
Max (Effective) Range: Short-Short/Medium
Efficiency (Damage/TU): Very High
Penetration (Versus Armour): Medium
Particle Beam:
Damage: High
Accuracy: High
Max Range: Medium/Long
Efficiency: Medium/High
Penetration: High
Ballistic (Bullet/Kinetic based):
Damage: Low
Accuracy: Medium
Max Range: Medium
Efficency: Medium/High
Penetration: Low/Medium
Laser:
Damage: Low
Accuracy: Very High
Max Range: Very Long
Efficency: Low
Penetration: Medium/High
-
First off, in my opinion there should be no max range whatsoever save for weapons like the plasma series which feature dissipating projectiles, where they would make sense. Let spread naturally determine maximum effective ranges rather than arbitrarily posing needless limitations.
I kind of like this idea. I remember hearing that a pistol bullet fired expertly can travel over a mile, by angling the bullet up. What if projectile weapons had a maximum range, and over that range there would be a 50/50 chance the bullet would hit the dirt? Then, we wouldn't see bullets disappear into the abyss. Though, the grenade launcher might be more limited than other projectile weapons, due to it's high mass and low velocity relative to other projectile weapons. Same for thrown weapons.
Also, the non-projectile weapons generally involve a beam, which would lose coherence with range. Technically, the beam weapons should lose strength with range, until they can't penetrate the uniforms.
-
For normal fire, I absolutely agree. Let the players decide whether they want to waste a shot on a small chance...
But range is also important for reaction fire. Imagine an alien walking back and forth on the other end of the map, and your guy is wasting all his TU and ammo firing at him with a SMG. Frustrating. So here a max range is definitely needed.
-
Hmm... Isn't that the same as forgetting to set your reaction fire to Aimed when you are on a long-range section of the map, and Burst when you enter a building? Tactics: to avoid that, dash your SMG guy over the open ground with no RF set, while he is covered by riflemen with Aimed Shot RF.
-
But range is also important for reaction fire. Imagine an alien walking back and forth on the other end of the map, and your guy is wasting all his TU and ammo firing at him with a SMG. Frustrating. So here a max range is definitely needed.
I agree, but it should be possible to specify at what hit probability/% a soldier is to engage in reaction fire, rather than rely on max range to define when he should. This allows the player more control and involvement, and consequently, allots more satisfaction and tactical depth to the game.
-
I remember hearing that a pistol bullet fired expertly can travel over a mile, by angling the bullet up. What if projectile weapons had a maximum range, and over that range there would be a 50/50 chance the bullet would hit the dirt?
A 9 mm pistol bullet might have a maximum range of several 100m using the optimal angle for max range but this does not matter anyway. The kinetic energy left to a bullet after flying a certain distance will be reduced to a point where it is not harmfull anymore due to air resistance. Not to mention that no human being possibly can aim with a gun 30 degrees up in the sky over the target and other factors like air density, wind etc. will have an extreme influence at extreme ranges.
The maximum range cannot be considered relevant in my opinion. At a certain distance the possibility to hit is very near zero. You might be able to luck shot but no one serious would try it in combat.
The interesting side is whether weapons like the laser should lose damage over distance. I think a laser loses coherency at a very low rate. If that's true I would disagree with this idea.
-
I agree partially, especially about close combat. I think close combat is extremely risky, there should be some benefits to compensate a _bit_
Here a few suggestions i.e. mostly based on bladed weapons or hammers:
- can cause enemy to lose weapon
- may move enemy a few squares back if you win the attack (you followup on the hit), this represents something like a bull rush forward (sounds desperate...)
- ability to destroy enemy weapons under certain circumstances (should be extremely rare)
Also, i dont want to make the game too complicated, but one thing which is great is any tech/skill tree for your soldiers. One could even focus on close combat, using ninja stealth suit and sneaking from alien to alien - just for fun! ;) might be a fun way to play the game using people with swords instead of guns against aliens
-
The interesting side is whether weapons like the laser should lose damage over distance. I think a laser loses coherency at a very low rate. If that's true I would disagree with this idea.
It does due to air particulate, and other diffusers, but I doubt if it'd be relevant over the maximum distances encountered in a typical battlescape map. Even if it is, it's not going to diffuse entirely over such a span (unless attempting to move through something like a smoke screen) and as such the effects of diffusion should be reflected in damage decay, not arbitrary maximum ranges.
-
In the ranges we are talking about lasers are unlikely to degrade much. The US Air Force is currently testing a laser replacement for the AC-130 Spectre Gunship (the C-130 Hercules transport aircraft with all the miniguns and cannon firing out the side). The current AC-130's usually operate around 5000 feet (3200m) which puts them within range of light anti-aircraft weapons and light missiles. The new laser turret in the same aircraft would do the job from 30,000 feet well out of the range of most light to medium anti-aircraft systems. And from 30,000 feet, the laser turret can precisely target a tire to disable a vehicle or the gas tank to blow it up.
Brett
-
In the ranges we are talking about lasers are unlikely to degrade much. The US Air Force is currently testing a laser replacement for the AC-130 Spectre Gunship (the C-130 Hercules transport aircraft with all the miniguns and cannon firing out the side). The current AC-130's usually operate around 5000 feet (3200m) which puts them within range of light anti-aircraft weapons and light missiles. The new laser turret in the same aircraft would do the job from 30,000 feet well out of the range of most light to medium anti-aircraft systems. And from 30,000 feet, the laser turret can precisely target a tire to disable a vehicle or the gas tank to blow it up.
That's nice for a big laser in a C-130. But as far as I understand laser tech the coherency of the beam is related to the qualities (i.e. in most cases size) of the components. Optical devices like a focussing lense or reflectors will be much smaller in a handgun. That would be a comparison between a 80MP professional airborne spycam with your mobile cam.
But breaking these numbers down to a laser rifle and -as you mentioned- much lower ranges you should still be right.