Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 06, 2019, 10:55:44 pm

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Savage: XR is a new patch for Savage, created by the Newerth.com staff. The XR1.1 Client is out now! Download it now!
189884 Posts in 10983 Topics by 18424 Members
Latest Member: ehohdfhdoo
* Home Forum Wiki Help Search Login Register
+  Newerth Forums
|-+  Savage XR
| |-+  Re-balancing Suggestions
| | |-+  Read 1st :: Post here your 2nd generation re-balancing suggestions
0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Read 1st :: Post here your 2nd generation re-balancing suggestions  (Read 30549 times)
Daemon
XR Main Developer
Legendary Member
****
Posts: 4810


beware, for this is the everbroken...


View Profile
« Reply #60 on: April 17, 2017, 02:30:38 pm »

The re-balancing suggestion: Make launcher and fireball very effective against conflux and transport respectively
1. The precise change you wanna see done, including exact values and item/unit names etc.
8 launcher/fully charged fireball hits should be enough to kill a conflux/transport.

Shooting 8 fireballs aimed at a huge, stationary target like the stronghold, takes 35s. I doubt you'll even have the luxury of shooting at a bus undisturbed for at least 35s. And there's also the standard way to kill human vehicles. Using blaze (+mana stone) to kill a bus takes 12-13s. Same with sac, not to count 1 behe hit.

Rockets are way faster than fireballs, but even so, they're harder to aim than the weapon of choice for killing bulky beast units, the pulse, who dispatches a conflux in 11s and with less than 3/4 ammo.

I agree that the fireball (and the rocket) need some boosting but this ain't it. Plus, with only one of conflux/bus left, there's really
« Last Edit: April 17, 2017, 02:35:41 pm by Daemon » Logged

Bullet
Python enthusiast
Newerth Donator
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 353



View Profile
« Reply #61 on: April 17, 2017, 08:46:31 pm »

The re-balancing suggestion: 
  • Completely re-worked squad system
    • More responsibility to officers
    • A new gold-layer to squads (no longer just playergold --> teamgold, but instead playergold--> squadgold --> teamgold)
    • Custom squad-sizes
    • Custom squadnames
    • Internal gold-request-rules and self-buff rules for squads
    • Squad-specific orders and minimap icons (given by officer)
    • Improved management over squads for commander
  • Incentives for players to be in squads in the first place
  • Improved teamwork, rewarding skill economically, without beeing to OP



1. The precise change you wanna see done, including exact values and item/unit names etc.
Generally, the idea is that squads gets a purpose, funds to do it, and gets much more usable.  How? Here it goes:

  • For the commanders:
     
    • Ability to create squads with purposes (names), custom maxsize (numbers of players who can be in the squad), custom tax-rate,custom self-buff setting for those players, and custom gold-account
         
      • An example of name can be: "Sacrush Group" or "Siege defence"
       
    • Commanders have six default, pre-made squads at the start of a match (which can be changed anytime by the commander):
             
      • General format: Name - Maxsize of players in squad - taxrate (how much players in the squad tax to the teamgold) - Self-buff default setting - Squadgold size
      • Scouts- Max Size 6 - Tax: 20 % - Selfbuffs: On - 3000
      • Miners- Max Size: 10 - Tax: 30 % - Selfbuffs: Off - 2000
      • Harassers- Max Size: 6 - Tax: 40 % - Selfbuffs: On - 10000
      • Base defense- Max Size: 10 - Tax: 30 % - Selfbuffs: On - 15000
      • Forward Garr- Max Size: 10 - Tax: 30 %)- Selfbuffs: Officers only - 19000
      • Gold - Max size: 3 - Tax: 100 %- Selfbuffs: Off - 1000
           
    • Effectively, the squad gold is not tied (not directly) to teamgold or players personal gold, its a new seperate account of gold, just for the squad.
           
      • Gold requests in squads can now work this way:
                 
        • Requests are first sent to squad-gold,and officers handle the requests (with keybinds to accept/decline the requests), and/or auto-accept/auto-decline setting in loadout-menu (only officers in the squad can see and change the settings in the loadout menu).
        • If denied from officers, the gold-request is denied, and nothing more happends.
        • If accepted, the gold requested is withdrawed from the squad-gold. If there is no gold or not enough gold to get the requested gold, the request is passed on to the regular team-gold, where the commander can use his settings to handle it(auto-accept, manual accept, etc.)
      • Here is how I imagine squadgold can be refilled:
        • Teamgold is filled first to 50K, before any squads earn anything. Squad specific tax-rates apply to the players in squads during this time (you can benefit more gold personally by chosing a squad with low tax-rate).
        • If teamgold is full, the squads tax their squad-specific tax-rate to their own squad instead of the team.
        • Gold-donations go to teamgold first. If teamgold is full, it goes to the squad-gold.
        • The squad tax-rate can be changed  in the loadout-menu by officers in the given squad
        • Commanders can decide the size of the squad-gold, with a minimum of 0 (0 = No squadgold, basically disabled for the squad) , and maximum of 20K, and with a maximum of 50K when all squads  combine their squadgold's maxsize.
                   
    • The commander can place players inside squads in the units screen (but they can leave, and play without beeing inside squad
    • The commander can pick 1 unit, 1 weapons and one item for each squad,  which get a 50 % discount in the loadout-menu if their squad-gold AND teamgold is full at the same time plus that each player in the squad must have a big surplus of gold self to reach this special bonus. (This is rather hard to achieve for a single squad, because other not-so-good squads will constantly drag down team-gold) but it is inteded to reward a squad which carry the team, and encourage usage of the squad's intended purpose). Siege units cannot be chosen.
  • For players:
    • Players are assigned randomly in warmup to a squad on the team they are in. Late joiners(joining in middle of match) dont get assigned, and have to pick the left-over squads.
    • Players cannot switch squads themself more than once per minute, just like there is a minimum wait-time to switch teams.Not even commanders can bypass this limit.
    • There can be maximum 3 officers per squad, with a total of maximum 20 % of the entire team beeing officers (commander excluded)
    • If and while no officers are appointed in a squad, the internal gold-requests in squads are set to auto-accept automatically.
    • Officers in squads can mark a target destination (with a small, pre-defined squad-coloured x) on minimap in loadout menu. Commander drawings overwrite these, and also clears it if he choses to clear the map
    • Squadmembers of your own squad have their own squad colour on the minimap. Allied players and other squads all have the same colour(but not your squad colour) colour.
    • Squadmembers of your own squad have their own squad colour on the minimap. Allied players and other squads all have the same colour.
    • Players are still free to play the way they want(even without squad), but are now incentivized to use squads because of the economical advantage, increased teamwork, and the unit/weapon/item discount 


Additional things, to make squads more usable in the game:
 - Squad name should show under teammates name if you mouseover them in the field (not on enemies though)
 - The current limit of only 6 squads per team should be removed (with 41 players on each team  on pulse = 41/6 ~7 players per squad, a bit too much imho)
 - Im pretty sure there is a limit to how many players can be in a squad aswell currently (6?) , and I think this limit should be able to set by the commander.
 - Squad selection in loadout menu for players :  with squad icon + name of squad + number of players in the squad showing + join button
 - Button to leave squad you current squad in loadout menu.
 - Although i like the feature to see what items, unit and weapons my squadmates are carrying im unsure if it would manage to fit all players in the current HUD setup for squads , this might need to be minimalized more to get place enough for all (in a large squad)

2. What triggered it (what is the CAUSE that made you think of something to eliminate that cause)

Noone uses squads, ever. Theres no incentive to use it for players, at all


3. The predicted overall effect of your change (its PURPOSE).

More teamplay, improved management of groups from commander, give players a reason to obey the squads purpose, give officers more responsibility besides giving orders.


The impact on the game:
4. What will become harder (or easier) to do, and for whom (units, teams etc).
Gold management will become easier, teamwork will become easier (in squads, ofc.), pushes will last longer if they are successive, good players are rewarded with more gold overall.


5. Will it make the game harder or easier for newbies (vs. veterans), and why.
Hard to tell, both teams are affected, but i do believe genuinly that the game will be more fun for both newbies and veterans.

The ripple effect
6. Subsequent changes needed to tone down (compensate for) the effects of this change.
Some of the values might need tweaking, particulary the maxsize for squads (if a team of 20 players are 10/5/5, in theory, they can have 50K extra teamgold if they do well) + the maximum squadgold of 20K is also maybe a bit much.

One thing that will need to be removed is that commanders select "missions" for the squads which get told in squad chat. The squad name alone will be a fitting indicator.

7. Other changes, which the current suggestion would benefit from or depends on (so it can work properly).
I think i mentioned them all, but could be some logical flaws that I have missed.

PS: Apoligize for any typing mistakes, I know its a long-ass post  Smiley[/list]
Logged

SavageBeard
XR Map Administrator
Sr. Member
***
Posts: 263


View Profile
« Reply #62 on: April 17, 2017, 09:11:39 pm »

Really overthinking a feature that should just be removed, if anything.

People find it annoying to be placed into random squads, and prefer to do their own thing anyway.

 As a commander you already have the attention of the few players who will do some team work, without having to divide everyone into squads, which isnt going to help make anyone listen.
Logged
Stringer
The guy who doesn't know anything
Newerth Council
Full Member
*
Posts: 125



View Profile
« Reply #63 on: April 17, 2017, 09:15:07 pm »

bullet, no offence, but you're crazy to post that big kind of a request and think someone will even think about implementing it.
If you want something like this to be done, you will have to find a programmer willing to code it on his own free time without pay that you can also trust with savage code.
GL with that.
Logged

Be wise
Bullet
Python enthusiast
Newerth Donator
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 353



View Profile
« Reply #64 on: April 17, 2017, 09:45:05 pm »

You're right, its crazy to hope for all that, but I do hope for some of that, maybe some of the key features. Besides, you never know what devs come around  Smiley

Logged

Trigardon
Forum Administrator
Legendary Member
****
Posts: 4812


Demonic Monster


View Profile WWW
« Reply #65 on: April 17, 2017, 09:54:37 pm »

Squads were surely useful at some point in clanwars, but nowadays there's no point wasting resources in a feature which will never be used anyway. Undecided
Logged

^.#Tasty
Doomed Noob
Clan Representative
Jr. Member
*
Posts: 83



View Profile WWW
« Reply #66 on: April 20, 2017, 08:11:15 am »

i Agree that squads are useful in clanwars  Afro

But we have no clanwars  You Ugly & Stupid
Logged

Bullet
Python enthusiast
Newerth Donator
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 353



View Profile
« Reply #67 on: June 07, 2017, 09:09:19 pm »

The re-balancing suggestion: This is not a re-balancing suggestion, rather a proposal to add  some new meta-gameplay between teams and their tech developement strategies. What I suggest adding is simple "shell" buildings the commander can create, based on all major techlines (not nexus/arcana/arsenal/rc), but to chem/fire/strata/mag/entrophy /elec , and charm shrine/siege workshop.

1. The precise change you wanna see done, including exact values and item/unit names etc.
Adding shell buildings (empty, no function beside looking like a real building), which cost 200 redstone, have a HP of 1000 and same buildtime as the building they are meant to look like. Limited to one building per tech (you can only build one mag shell building for example). All models are the same size as their real counterpart.

2. What triggered it (what is the CAUSE that made you think of something to eliminate that cause)
I find the simplicity in the way the tech strategies in savage, particular in early games - to be a bit too repetive and predicatble. If there was some way a commander could trick the other enemy team that they went for fire for example, but instead went strata, that could lead to some interesting gameplay and deceptive strategies between commanders early on, but also at later stages.

3. The predicted overall effect of your change (its PURPOSE).
Add more meta-gameplay between teams and commanders, make scouting more important and fun, add more fun to basebuilding for both races (where are you going to hide the real techbuilding youre building from the enemy scouts?). Increased interest in enemy tech-developement from your own team, more focus on what tactic your own team use. More rewarding for skilled commanders.

The impact on the game:
4. What will become harder (or easier) to do, and for whom (units, teams etc).
Scouting will become harder and more important,  but more interesting aswell. On very large maps the tactics are less likely to be used (but so is behemoths, gates, scattergun and a bunch of other stuff aswell). , but on mid-sized and small sized maps it can be really interesting I think.

5. Will it make the game harder or easier for newbies (vs. veterans), and why.
Hard to say, as a commander can use the tactic for tricking the opponent, and its success rely on the opponent team and their reaction(specifically - their commanders reaction). I dont think there will be any bigger gaps between newbie commanders and veteran commanders.

The ripple effect
6. Subsequent changes needed to tone down (compensate for) the effects of this change.
None that comes to my mind.
  
7. Other changes, which the current suggestion would benefit from or depends on (so it can work properly).
I think the building tab for commanders might need an own option to build shell buildings (properly marked as shell buildings).
Additionally, fake garrisons and sublairs might be a interesting concept as well (tricking the enemy to defend with a fake sneak can be interesting..)  
« Last Edit: June 07, 2017, 10:02:00 pm by Bullet » Logged

Bullet
Python enthusiast
Newerth Donator
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 353



View Profile
« Reply #68 on: June 09, 2017, 05:11:27 pm »

New suggestion:

When the difference in number of players on the team are bigger or great er than two, I suggest that the team with the lest amount of people, get increased gold from kills. The amount of increased gold is based on (percentage-wise) how much more players the other team is. For example: if there is 5 vs 10, the 5 people will get 200 % gold, instead of 100% gold when there is 5 vs 5. If there is 7 vs 5, the 5-man team get 140% gold, because 2 more players = 40 of their own force.

The idea is to help teams when just random bailing occurs. Since it is based on percentages, it works good no matter what the server population is.

Sorry for not following normal form, Im writing from mobile while I still have the idea bright on my mind.
Logged

drk
Community Serveradmin
XR Coder
Hero Member
***
Posts: 547



View Profile
« Reply #69 on: June 12, 2017, 08:33:58 am »

Suggestion: make fire/elec/mag/etc regen that depends on the quantity of the buildings. For example: 2nd fire increases regeneration by X%.
In this case a team/com that controls a lot of territory (and mines) will have an advantage to win.
Logged

Daemon
XR Main Developer
Legendary Member
****
Posts: 4810


beware, for this is the everbroken...


View Profile
« Reply #70 on: June 12, 2017, 05:55:36 pm »

Suggestion: make fire/elec/mag/etc regen that depends on the quantity of the buildings. For example: 2nd fire increases regeneration by X%.
In this case a team/com that controls a lot of territory (and mines) will have an advantage to win.
That means more frequent buffs and that sucks. It's also the reason the altars/caches do not add to the buff pool regen - less buffs, less frustration. But of course, we can discuss it.
Logged

Storky
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 83



View Profile
« Reply #71 on: June 13, 2017, 09:37:56 pm »

XP and gold reward for healing/reviving.
Death with successful sac not counts. Successful means inflict damage in close range, close range means range when sac killing basic tower.

added: chaos bolt almost unusable. Add mana refund for successful shot in amount of shot's cost (but not vs buildings). Means with 100% accuracy mana not wasting, gonna be tactically interesting and slow kind of pulse cannon vs siege.


« Last Edit: June 13, 2017, 09:44:30 pm by Storky » Logged

\m/
drk
Community Serveradmin
XR Coder
Hero Member
***
Posts: 547



View Profile
« Reply #72 on: June 14, 2017, 07:42:47 am »

XP and gold reward for healing/reviving.
Now if you heal you get an XP. If you revive you get gold (1000). Isn't that enough?
Logged

Bullet
Python enthusiast
Newerth Donator
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 353



View Profile
« Reply #73 on: June 15, 2017, 05:42:43 pm »

Suggestion: Some simple buff suggestions, applied to different targets than the usual player. I hope that savage can have more variation in buffs (but not in total number of buffs used in a normal game), for the sake of varitiation. I hope that savage can get atleast 3 buff for each tech-tree, and go away from only beeing targetting individuals. I suggest and hope that each tech tree can get:
1 buff for solo players (allready in place for most tech tree, except entrophy)
1 buff for enemy players  ( i know its not a buff, but for the sake of simplicity i call it that now)
1 teamwide buff for your own team.
1 buff for friendly or enemy structures/tech.
1 mapwide buff, affecting both teams in some way.

The more players and gameplay the buffs affect, the weaker they must be, in general, for balancing purposes.

Following is some simple buff suggestions i have ( i know some of them are straightforward bad ideas, but its just brainstorming, to give you devs some food for thought if you were to make more buffs into the game).
Buff 1:
a buff that makes you drop no-gold if killed while buff is active, and any enemy who kill you(with ranged, melee or buffs) are drained instatnly of their personal gold (and it is given to you upon your death). Other buffs cancel the buff.  This buff can work for both races. Its particular interesting to use as humans, demorunning. You got no special powers, but it simply sucks to kill you for any enemy.

Buff 2:
 buff that simply cancel buffs on enemies upon successfull melee hit (beast buff mainly). Newbiefriendly buff, great counter for selfbuffers.

buff 3:
A map-wide buff that makes all npcs go crazy and run towards your teams sh/lair. Great for stealing the gold income of other teams.

buff 4:
Commander can select a specific enemy, and remove half their exp (basically, level that person down ).

buff 5:
Commander selects an enemy player and trigger the buff on him. The buff is active as long as he is alive, and persist even after re-supplying and/or changing gear in loadout menus in spawnpoints. What it does, is basically make his melee weapon useless (does only 1 hp damage on successful hit), and forces him to use ranged weaponry only. Its a great buff for humans to use on beast players, forcing that specific player to keep his distance. The buff should be expensive and be an alternative in a tech tree to other buffs (not solo buff for a tech three).

buff 6. Similar like buff 5, but forces player to use melee weapons only. Ranged weapons doesnt do any damage at all while it is active. Great for beasts against camping humans. Last a lifetime.

buff 7. This is a special one : Corrupted redstone mine. If a commander fear he is about to loose an important redstone mine to the enemy, he can corrupt it - basically making it a bomb, that explodes when mined empty. The damage equals to 4-5 sacrifices, and will damange both friendly and enemy buildings nearby. Use with caution. The other commander cannot see that a redstone mine is corrupted. It is very expensive, in terms of pool usage. Can only be cast on redstone mines which are close to your own buildings ( you cannot target a redstone mine in the base of the enemy, to illustrate this).

buff 8. Blood smelling animals. All NPC's on the map will instantly start to attack nearby enemies (if withing a certain radius of the npc). Great for pissing of the other team, and distract the enemy in the combat. (in terms of the lore of savage, this buff belongs to the beast team - could possibly be a nice, cheaper alternative than the gate, in the entrohpy tech tree?)

buff 9. Mark a group of animals, and use buff on them. They wont respawn in 3 minutes, after killed. Great for goldstarving the other team. OP on small maps, must be expensive to use (not just buff pool to use it - maybe some money required aswell?)

buff 10. Target a friendly structure. Simply doubles the range of the friendly structure (only works on defensive buildings such as towers and spires).

buff 11. Target a enemy defensive building. The enemy defensive building will, while the buff is active, only target siege units, but not only your teams siege unit, also siege camping players which are, in theory, friendly to the tower initially, but during buff it targets all siege unites. This is great for dealing with siege campers on the other team, and very helpful for your team offensively

buff 12. Target enemy spawnpoint/spawn structure. While active, anyone trying to spawn will be sent back to loadout menu and get 5 seconds to their respawn timer. The buff last only 5 seconds, and is medium expensive to use. Cannot be used on sh/lair.

buff 13. Creates a portal, which allies and enemies can go trough, but no siege units can enter. Much like gate, minus entrance for siege units. Call it a cheap and downgraded gate, if you wish. HP decays over time, self destruct in 90 seconds, regardless of HP.


PS. I hope other people can post their buff suggestions aswell, if they have any.

To Daemon: isnt this thread a bit old, the initial posts and whatnot havent been updated or achieved after 1.3 release... ? It can be a little confusing to read old discussions which might not apply to xr 1.3  Smiley








Logged

Daemon
XR Main Developer
Legendary Member
****
Posts: 4810


beware, for this is the everbroken...


View Profile
« Reply #74 on: June 15, 2017, 06:09:15 pm »

To Daemon: isnt this thread a bit old, the initial posts and whatnot havent been updated or achieved after 1.3 release... ? It can be a little confusing to read old discussions which might not apply to xr 1.3  Smiley

Indeed. You volunteering to compile the list of changes? I have zero time these days.
Logged

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.03 seconds with 19 queries.