Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Summarise your ideal balance changes

405 posts, 8891 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
Page of 21 (405 records)
sort



GBrank[GBC]1v0ry_k1ng
7 months ago
Does Kodachi really need to have team damage?
+1 / -0



AUrankAdminSaktoth
7 months ago
(edited 7 months ago)

The only unit that doesn't do friendly damage is outlaw AFAIK? I don't think this is what is holding Koda/Blitz back.

The original idea with tanks was that you would expand defended, the tank cons would supplement your LLTs and defenders and insta-build LLTs where needed in response to threats, their high BP and HP would give them time to do that. Meanwhile to keep the enemy honest and keep their raiders at home you use your fast, hard to catch raiders, messing his base up if he tries to leave it. After this eco boom you'd make tanks and knock the enemy door down.

This actually worked okay vs other facs, but just has never really worked against Scorchers, which is Tanks most common match up. I don't think Welder can be made good against Scorcher, it's just too perfectly optimized to eat through Welders HP. Tanks now have a cheaper Riot, but it's still one of the most expensive in the game. The only thing that's ever worked with Tank vs Veh is Panther spam, which became the only unit in the factory when it was good, rather than a stepping stone to the heavier units.

We tried weakly to make Blitz and Koda work together as a part of our 'two units in the raider game' initiative to add an anti-unit and an anti-building raider to each factory. But what we learnt from Duck/Archer was that if these units are too specialized, it's just too expensive to build one of each before you can start putting pressure on, and your composition falls apart if you lose one or the other.

Blitz and Koda were meant to work together because they can stun you and throw fireballs in your way while running away, potentially even trapping you in fireballs and making it impossible to close on them. This has never worked either. Another idea was that the Blitz would mostly do stun, and be great vs enemy raiders, but be terrible at raiding buildings because it takes too long to kill them. Meanwhile the ground DoT from Koda would be easy to evade but would burn buildings down over time. Alternatively, the Koda could be given a lot of Aoe and more upfront damage to blast unit packs apart, while the Panther could be given a low enough RoF (and target move error but meh to that) so that it was poor vs units. These were never attempted with full gusto though so that never really materialized.

It would probably be too late at this point to rework Koda into a fast flame leveler. Blitz could always be good against scorcher specifically as long as you can make sure it doesn't become the only unit in the factory: Either by lowering say, its HP or dropping it's RoF even more, or pumping it's death AoE (Which also adds utility against scorcher dives for lategame tank compositions). This is a tightrope we've walked many times before to no success but there has to be some set of numbers that work.
+2 / -0


USrankOflameo
7 months ago
I don't think Kodachis and Blitzes are used as a combo because either one or the other seem to be good against the opposing factory.

Blitzes seem to be good against Rovers. Kodachis seem to be good against bots. Blitzes synergize with each other much better than they synergize with Kodichis.
+1 / -0

PTrankraaar
6 months ago
(edited 6 months ago)

commander balance (again)


generic module changes:

- high power servos : +8% speed -> +10% (if you dislike generically fast commanders, change the cap from x8 to x6 or x5)

- Disruptor ammo : beams/mg/shotgun get 25% reduced base dps to get 50% of base dps as extra slow damage, not half. Also it should only affect either the shotgun/mg or the beams, not both (currently the only strike commander weapon not converted is the missile launcher)

- napalm warhead should reduce the base dps by 25% (currently I think it's 0% for the rocket and 50% for the riot cannon) and light the ground on fire for 3s longer

- missile launcher : +10% range

- rocket launcher : +10% range

- increase the AOE of the hellfire grenade by 50%, or reduce reload time significantly

- slightly reduce reload time on manual fire weapons

- increase the cost of cloak module by 100 (it's way better than shields)

- reduce cost of drone upgrades by 20%

- lower the vertical climb duration of the S.L.A.M bomb by half

- shock rifle : reduce reload time from 12s to 11s


so we talked about level 6+ modules that gave chassis some unique options, here's some suggestions:


all of them would cost 400M and require level6 (players get the secondary weapon on the 3rd morph, could get these on the 5th morph or later)

ONLY ONE of these modules would be allowed, so people would need to choose them wisely.

note that the -X% HP effects stack multiplicatively with existing bonuses, the other effects stack additively


--- RECON
a) ultralight plating -20% HP, +60% speed
b) jumper boosters, +20% speed, halved jump reload time


--- STRIKE
a) rogue energizer : +10% speed, +15% damage, halved recloak delay
b) skirmisher tuning : -10% HP, +10% range, +20% damage, increase sight radius to 700


--- GUARDIAN
a) overcharger : +40% damage
b) disruption wave generator : adds outlaw's area slow damage (in addition to whatever weapons the commander may have)


--- ENGINEER
a) area regeneration : heals units within 300 range by 3 + 0.2% HP/s (stacks from multiple adjacent commanders)
b) long range sensors : -10% HP, +15% range, change sight radius to 1000

+2 / -0

PTrankraaar
6 months ago
ah and remove the commanders' disintegrator weapon module.

People that want to be sneaky and kill stuff should use damage modules + cluster bomb instead, or heatrays or something.
+1 / -0

LUrankAnir
6 months ago
PTrankraaar, even if i'm normaly totaly against everything which includes commanders getting stronger, i like your idea there, but i fear that it will just make them OP.
+0 / -0


NOrankKingstad
6 months ago
The servo nerf hasnt bothered me much so far and it'd be less convoluted if you can have an equal amount of each module, but yes cloak nerf would be good.
Dunno why you would buff rockets..
Would very much like to see a speedier recon com
"skirmisher tuning" looks like crap compared to all other options, otherwise these look like a lot of fun but surely will cause a lot more morphing
+0 / -0

PLrankkapsi
6 months ago
Fleas should explode like nukes
+2 / -0

PTrankraaar
6 months ago
I edited the post a bit.


quote:

Dunno why you would buff rockets..


Rockets are underwhelming unless you get the napalm warheads upgrade. I updated the list to add the nerf to how the napalm warheads affects the rockets to have it consistent with the riot cannon (which gets a buff).


quote:
"skirmisher tuning" looks like crap compared to all other options, otherwise these look like a lot of fun but surely will cause a lot more morphing


I think the strike form gets an extra "free" module as it morphs to the 5th level relative to the guardian form : 3x regen vs 2x ablative plates. I increased the dmg bonus by 5%.

+0 / -0


NOrankKingstad
6 months ago
The rocket thing makes more sense then, never any reason not to go napalm warhead.
So wouldnt you want to argue for balance in the chassis themselves? Considering it effectively has a free module. Striker certainly gets insane regen without trying.
+0 / -0


ESrankShyrka
6 months ago
Suicide units (Skuttle, Snitch, Blastwing, Imp, Limplet) should detonate upon capture by Dominatrix.
+0 / -0




EErankAdminAnarchid
6 months ago
(edited 6 months ago)

In the vein of "give flea a nuke sidearm" and "make commanders supreme again" :

All units which have vision should have sonar range that is equal to that vision, without exception or constraint to only water-going units.

While "units that can enter or shoot into water" is a bit of a natural rule, it's still impossible to know which units have sonar without reading their description or having learned the rule first.

The mechanic of "units that cannot enter water or shoot into water are unable to see submerged units" is, pun intended, itself completely invisible. Oh, also Owl neither shoots nor walks on water.

If sea needs stealth, this can be achieved via giving the units that want to be stealthy an actual cloak. While cloak doesn't work underwater, submarines are sufficiently close to the surface to be bumpable by everything else. Amphibs that wish to be stealthy may do so in buoy mode.
+2 / -0


AUrank4hundred
6 months ago
(edited 6 months ago)

This thread is also available as an ebook, ZK balance discussions. ebook audio bonuses available characterized as per contributor
+0 / -0

PTrankraaar
6 months ago
quote:

(attempt at making a concrete list of changes to commanders to improve the game)

gets 1 upvote

quote:

Fleas should explode like nukes

gets 2 upvotes

hmmm....
+2 / -0


CHrankConnetable
6 months ago
"While cloak doesn't work underwater"

Is it an engine thing?
+0 / -0



AUrankAdminAquanim
6 months ago
(edited 6 months ago)

The more pressing problem is that decloak range is spherical (so that planes don't decloak things) but then in deep water amphs and subs can't decloak one another (without the amphs floating).

EDIT: There are two primary gameplay distinctions between the current state of affairs and all units having sonar:
(1) If you make naked eco on a sea map you will have less warning when it is attacked by amphs or subs.
(2) Amphs can hide from land units on maps with puddles (e.g. Onyx Cauldron, Iced Coffee).

The other issues are
(1) steeper learning curve
(2) is it aesthetically pleasing that underwater units have some intel advantage of this kind
+0 / -0



AUrankAdminGoogleFrog
6 months ago
The commander modules are ok in principal. If you're going to get speed I think it should cost range. I dislike auras for their scalability.

Cloak does not work underwater because I made it that way.

A change I want to consider is more static shield for small shields. Currently small shields start at 2/3 charge and it has been this way forever. Why not make them start at full charge?
+1 / -0

PTrankraaar
6 months ago
quote:

If you're going to get speed I think it should cost range.


most of the existing weapons are already short-ranged. To extend that range significantly players already have to sacrifice speed (20% at x8).

quote:

I dislike auras for their scalability.


what do you mean?



+0 / -0




EErankAdminAnarchid
6 months ago
(edited 6 months ago)

quote:
The more pressing problem is that decloak range is spherical (so that planes don't decloak things) but then in deep water amphs and subs can't decloak one another (without the amphs floating).

Now that cloak can only exist on the surface (or close to the surface) this issue becomes entirely an amph issue because any seaborne cloaker (amph or not!) can be trivially found by ships or hovercraft. There are three things that could be done to address this, then:

1) The seaborne cloaker units could have large decloak radii. While this doesn't guarantee that things cannot avoid detection by amphs passing beneath, this can be practically similar to Athena.

Note that it takes around 90 depth for the largest meaningfully submersible unit (Grizzly) to completely go under. At this depth, area-cloaked daggers on the surface are currently decloaked by ducks walking on the sea bottom, so i would say this is probably unnecessary even now.

Depths much larger than this are problematic for other reasons (camera and general UI), so i'm not sure they should be a concern here at all.

Seawolves specifically are currently not cloakable because they are fully submerged and exist with their center below the waves. But if they were cloakable, their decloak sphere would also be closer do the ducks, so also more decloakable by them.

2) The sea maps could avoid having so much depth that the previous approach breaks. Maps which have this much depth could be modified or removed.

3) Amphibs could have a surfacing unit useful for screening/sweeping. Perhaps an inflatable dirtbag, or a thing that can do hops while floating, or a squid with multiple surfacing sidekicks. I don't have any robust designs, though.

quote:
(2) Amphs can hide from land units on maps with puddles (e.g. Onyx Cauldron, Iced Coffee).

Conceded, with provisions: unsure if that impactful. Even if they are visible, they are still invincible there, and, additionally, even if you remove the water outright, these basins come with sharp cliffs that likely have enough LoS shadow to hide anyway.

quote:
(1) steeper learning curve

It's not even steepness that i find annoying here, it's discoverability. The mechanic is invisible because it is not shown in any way except in the unit description excel table and in the consequences of you being rekt by its use.

There are even outright misleading bits. Los for ground units is still rendered on sea bottom where in fact it has no power:


quote:
(2) is it aesthetically pleasing that underwater units have some intel advantage of this kind

They do get to keep their radar stealth. This also applies to the naked eco argument.

While i formerly advocated merging sonar and radar buildings, the sonar building no longer exists, and i don't feel any need to reintroduce it, perhaps aside from the los rendering argument above. But i feel it's much less impactful and important for radar, which is rendered in outlines anyway.
+0 / -0



AUrankAdminAquanim
6 months ago
(edited 6 months ago)

quote:
The mechanic is invisible because it is not shown in any way except in the unit description excel table and in the consequences of you being rekt by its use.

There are even outright misleading bits. Los for ground units is still rendered on sea bottom where in fact it has no power

I am not aware of any reports of players having found this confusing or misleading in practice. It's possible I've just forgotten them I suppose.

(Even the old thoroughly inconsistent sonar system didn't seem to be a primary problem with sea.)

To the best of my knowledge, as 'poorly documented and confusing mechanics' go sonar isn't a major offender.
[Spoiler]
+1 / -0
Page of 21 (405 records)