Fixing Weapon Balance - the Methodical Way

[CMaster]

So, we all know that weapon balance is well, so broken that calling it a "balance" is something of a joke. In yet another indication that 2.2 was dramatically ill-considered, the changes were rushed out despite plenty of us pointing out that weapon balance was in an abysmal state, and the "fixes" since then have completely missed the point. (The generic burst-weapon buff left AKs and pulselasers overpowered, while other bursts - gats and smgs/assaults are still useless). The extreme strength of a few weapons also makes it hard to come to any clear idea about where class balance is at overall too.

So, what's the fix for all this? Assuming under the hood of Neocron it's fairly simple to change weapon values, there's a few steps to go through:

1. Arbitarily pick freqency, magazine size, range, aimspeed for weapon series (eg Beam laser pistol, assault rifle, raygun cannon, etc). The numbers should obviously represent the sort of "feel" a weapon is required to have. It's also important to remember that aim speed is heavily effected by range - I don't know the exact mathematics for it, but I'd hazard a guess that if you want a weapon with half the range to aim identically to the other, you'll need to give the shorter ranged one double the aim speed.
2. Allowing for capped frequency and reloads, set the per-shot damage so as to give all weapons a total damage rate (DPS seems as good as any) that scales linearly with TL, as was the original intention of 2.2. (I'm still not sure that linear scale with TL is the right answer, but I think it could be made to be, with the right tweaks elsewhere). For weapons like rayguns and fusion, take the damage at 50% range as the point used. AoE weapons probably need to be done on a seperate graph entirely.
3. Make some gross modifications to the damage by weapon type (HC/MC/PC/APU/etc). There's some value-decisions to be made here, which we'll come back to later. Basically, heavy stronger than pistol etc.
4. Now, tweak the numbers by series a lot. Weapons like plasma that miss a lot probably need to go up. Weapons that having amazing aiming and range like beam laser probably down. Weapons with big magazines, or very low freqs (snipers, ion pistol) probably need to go down. Weapons with exotic damage types probably need to go down.
5. Playtest a little. Tweak in response to that. This includes altering aiming rates etc as seems necessary to get the desired "feel" from each weapon.
6. Consider applying the old modifiers again (ie rare + x%, WoC + x%, etc). I'd suggests that those modifiers are actually too big, and probably all need halving.
7. Unleash on the retail game, with the commitment to monitoring what weapons and continuing to tweak values as necessary. Be prepared to buff as well as nerf

For this to really work well of course, the bug with beam weapons really needs fixing.

I think at the end of a process like that, we'd be back in a situation where class setup and viability wasn't dominated by a few overpowered weapons. A big concern would be that without some changes to weapon-skilling, implants and indeed weapon-spread (and dealing with the stupidity that is current PA), PvP weapon choice will simply come down to "use the highest TL you can" or at least "the highest TL you can with chosen number of resist chips". Hopefully for some people at least, personal taste with the different weapon "feels" that are generated should matter more than pure DPS.

There are obviously a few value judgements to be made along the way: Just what should each weapon type "feel" like; how different should the weapon classes be; how powerful should AoE be in comparison with single target; and so on.

On the weapon classes, I think I'd be happy with something like this: HC/MC >> Rifle > Pistol > APU/Drone. However, with some extra caveats: HC weapons should give significant slowdown to the user when wielded; rifles should cause little slowdown but have a real penalty to aiming while moving (maybe exclude special cases - ie shotguns); APUs should aquire an additional range of skills to compensate, something I'll set out my stall for in another post (if not, then APU obviously needs to be up at the other end).

As for the AoE/single target thing - I think that AoE probably still hits too hard at the moment and needs to be comparativley weaker. There's a careful bit of judgement here of course - too weak and nobody will use it - but look at the total damage done by a RGC or a barrel on a group of say 6 targets, to that of any single target, and I think it's clear that one of those is the best choice by far too much.

The nature of these "value judgement" elements is of course that people are going to disagree with them. I'd like to see how other people feel that NC should be in the weapon heirarchy.

[Netphreak]

Seems strange that no-ones replied to this, but it does seem like a good way to go about balancing weapon damage.

[William Antrim]

APU needs to be higher. APU should have similar range to rifle Spy IMO. Not pistol spy. AOE needs to have a maximum number of targets to apply damage too also imo. The rest of this post has been said on many occasions by many people.

[Dribble Joy]

Allowing for capped frequency and reloads, set the per-shot damage so as to give all weapons a total damage rate (DPS seems as good as any) that scales linearly with TL, as was the original intention of 2.2.

This is what I have been think of suggesting. Factoring in variable freq when you have set reloading times makes balancing the dps considerably harder given the skill system. You can then base everything off the dmg value associated with the weapon.

Now, tweak the numbers by series a lot. Weapons like plasma that miss a lot probably need to go up. Weapons that having amazing aiming and range like beam laser probably down. Weapons with big magazines, or very low freqs (snipers, ion pistol) probably need to go down.

Or, the plasma and other 'bullet' weapons could be made to hit as often as other weapons and the burst bonus removed entirely (never really saw the point of it frankly).

Weapons with exotic damage types probably need to go down.

I don't see the exotic dmg types as a problem really. People only have problems with them because they spam armour/resist into energy and piercing. If ammo mods actually altered the dmg type in a meaningful way, then the exotic ammo types would not be an issue.

Consider applying the old modifiers again (ie rare + x%, WoC + x%, etc). I'd suggests that those modifiers are actually too big, and probably all need halving.

Or ditch them entirely and let non-rares compete with all the others.

HC/MC >> Rifle > Pistol > APU/Drone.

I'm tempted to say that make them equal. Tanks, tanks Spies and Monks all have higher skill points/tech level than PEs. Small deviations depending on class defence might be necessary of course.

However, with some extra caveats: HC weapons should give significant slowdown to the user when wielded; rifles should cause little slowdown but have a real penalty to aiming while moving (maybe exclude special cases - ie shotguns); APUs should aquire an additional range of skills to compensate, something I'll set out my stall for in another post (if not, then APU obviously needs to be up at the other end).

Not sure about that. I'm not certain I like the idea of aiming for any class differing from another. Of course it raises the question of what drawback or benefit there is to having a longer or shorter range.

APU should have similar range to rifle Spy IMO.

AOE needs to have a maximum number of targets to apply damage too also imo.

Probably the best fix to AoE going.

[William Antrim]

Instead of just a ridiculous smiley tell me why its a bad idea?

APU has some of the weakest defence around. Why cant rifle spies and APUs be put on a par with one another damage output/defence-wise?

If the APU had some range he would be a much easier class to play in PvE and possibly even viable in PvP.

[Dribble Joy]

Oh I think that APU probably needs be the most powerful, but not the range that HC and rifles can reach. Not sure if it should be more than pistols currently are though.

(It's also quite possible to PvE on pistols btw, I hunt firemobs with one.)

[Mortis]

the best way for balancing is to not let communitys discuss about it

[William Antrim]

I think apu needs range. At least on a par with pistols if not more.

[Dropout]

the best way for balancing is to not let communitys discuss about it

Against freedom of speech..?

I think apu needs range. At least on a par with pistols if not more.

APU's should have a bit more range yes.
Make the reticle slowly close in on targets far away (still not rifle range though).

And as always IMO ^^

[William Antrim]

90% of pvp happens well inside pistol range anyway. I don't understand why there is animosity towards APUs having some decent range. Truthfully this would only affect their ability to level solo if done correctly. It would allow them to properly get away from mobs just like rifle spies do and range stuff the way tanks and spies always have. If youre going to make an APU the equivalent of a spy more or less in terms of his resists then he should enjoy the benefits at least one facet of the spy class gets. It just seems like common sense to me. Even if you dont make the beam spells have good range then at least give them a ranged halo spell. If the damage is going to be restricted by the reticle closure as well then it makes EVEN more sense to give them range as they trade off some of their damage for said range.

As you can tell I am a big fan of this.


I think AOE should get restricted to up to 4 mobs too btw. So its not OP as hell. I want this for ALL forms of AOE.

[IanKett]

APU needs to be higher. APU should have similar range to rifle Spy IMO. Not pistol spy. AOE needs to have a maximum number of targets to apply damage too also imo. The rest of this post has been said on many occasions by many people.

I agree with this

[Doc Holliday]

me 2.

APU deffo needs a range increase. Maybe not so high as what a rifle user gets but definitely a much needed increase over what he gets atm and even half again on what pistol users get.

[BlueRobot]

No to sniper APUs pls.

Maybe give only a few spells like energy lance a higher range, but I don't like the idea of being sniped with beam spells while hunting at all. The devs should stick to what was working best in the past and try to make it work again in a balanced way, and I don't recall APUs ever being able to snipe stuff.


About the weapon balancing: Most of the stuff is quite reasonable but not really new, but theres one huge problem: Only balancing weapons will be completely useless if you dont balance resists/runspeed/low lvl psi for pe/blabla because peoply will still just use the highest dps weapon they can use while being fast enough for whatever comes after the clipping patch.

Also PvE could be completely fucked over if you change the weapon stats. ATM the pve value of a weapons pretty much increases constantly with the tl increase, so what CMaster suggests would probably make some weapon like Pain Easer better for pve than dissi.

In my opinion, trying to fix the weapon balance alone can't work.

[CMaster]

About the weapon balancing: Most of the stuff is quite reasonable but not really new, but theres one huge problem: Only balancing weapons will be completely useless if you dont balance resists/runspeed/low lvl psi for pe/blabla because peoply will still just use the highest dps weapon they can use while being fast enough for whatever comes after the clipping patch.

Balancing needs to be a joined up thing? Wow, it's almost like I've been trying to make that point all along. More reasonably though, there are too many parameters to hope to humanly comprehend. You want to make nice, consistent, predictably behaving systems, and make appropriate adjustments based of testing. That's what NC lacks at the moment - most of the underlying logic is simply absent, or confused with so many random offsets. I've also written articles about problems with, armour, resists, approaches to the APU, etc. I'm working on one about passive psi. I've also touched on the issue of mainskill/weapon skill balancing, and that's something that I need to come back to and cover more completely.

ATM the pve value of a weapons pretty much increases constantly with the tl increase, so what CMaster suggests would probably make some weapon like Pain Easer better for pve than dissi.

. No it doesn't. That's a big part of the problem. That's what I'm saying SHOULD happen (ish) (which would mean a Dissy did approx 25% more damage than a PE). Yes, weapon damage increases with TL within a weapon series. But some weapon series (laser beams, pulselasers) are absolutely fantastic, while others (gats, shotguns) are completely and utterly useless in comparison. The reason class balance is so screwed up at the moment is that a couple of key weapons lines are vastly overpowered. So making a character who can use a high-TL member of those lines is all that really matters.


On the other points raised: APU damage being lower is based on implementing this plan - APUs would be able to bring their own damage up and received damage down to competitive levels by use of their new skills. Hopefully.

You do realize that current rifle range is "beyond visual range" right - you can take out targets from beyond NC draw distance with enough WEP and the right weapon. Not sure that APUs should really be able to call HL down at that sort of gap.

What DJ says is in general sensible. I think there are several ways you could make the different weapon types "feel" sufficiently different while still bringing weapon balance over all in line. There are just going to be different ideas of how to do it.

[William Antrim]

What is wrong with apus having short and long ranged spells like spies. If spies have the option of both then apus should have it also.