login

Author Topic: Balance issues for 2.3.1  (Read 52719 times)

Matheus

  • Guest
Re: TLD: Balance issues for 2.3.1
« Reply #30 on: June 18, 2007, 01:25:18 PM »
Every time I try to enter in Caras Galadhon my game crash.

The place is too big, just a big forest really, but its too much for some vid cards or comps apparently. Ill have to come up with a set of elf places for lower-spec computers.

Id avoid the elves for now.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2007, 06:08:04 PM by Ancientwanker »

Offline Senta

  • Craftsman
  • **
  • Posts: 114
    • View Profile
Re: TLD: Balance issues for 2.3.1
« Reply #31 on: June 18, 2007, 01:37:18 PM »
Every time I try to enter in Caras Galadhon my game crash.

that should go to bug reports Matheus.

OT: i think free folk (and possibly corsairs and easterlings) need some sort of prisoner management. i just rescued a lesser host of Rohan from Isengard (losing most of my troops in process) because they had something like 100 prisoners and that would swell Isen's numbers up too much. Orcs eat their prisoners, Harads sacrifice them but Rohan/Gondor just carry them around for no reason, making them too slow to escape and/or pursuit others...

also, is there a reason why there's no rescued prisoners parties? it is a shame for good troops to go to waste as i don't always have enough room for all of them...

Stemmers?

  • Guest
Re: TLD: Balance issues for 2.3.1
« Reply #32 on: June 18, 2007, 02:08:04 PM »
The native axe that the Uruk-Hai warrior starts with might as well be a two-handed butterknife, does 25 cutting damage, extremely low compared to almost any other 2-handed cutting weapon in the game. Not fun when the easiest thing you can fight in the beginning are well-armed Rohan scouts. Maybe give them a better faction-specific weapon?

MastaSpoofa

  • Guest
Re: TLD: Balance issues for 2.3.1
« Reply #33 on: June 18, 2007, 02:14:01 PM »
The native axe that the Uruk-Hai warrior starts with might as well be a two-handed butterknife, does 25 cutting damage, extremely low compared to almost any other 2-handed cutting weapon in the game. Not fun when the easiest thing you can fight in the beginning are well-armed Rohan scouts. Maybe give them a better faction-specific weapon?

eh? even my elven/dunedain boy's get smashed up by those 2 handed axes! 2 hits and my boy's are gone, after all that hard work to get them  :'(

Stemmers?

  • Guest
Re: TLD: Balance issues for 2.3.1
« Reply #34 on: June 18, 2007, 02:30:02 PM »
The native axe that the Uruk-Hai warrior starts with might as well be a two-handed butterknife, does 25 cutting damage, extremely low compared to almost any other 2-handed cutting weapon in the game. Not fun when the easiest thing you can fight in the beginning are well-armed Rohan scouts. Maybe give them a better faction-specific weapon?

eh? even my elven/dunedain boy's get smashed up by those 2 handed axes! 2 hits and my boy's are gone, after all that hard work to get them  :'(

You're probably thinking of the great axes, battleaxes and butterfly axes that the higher-level troops get. The starting axe that the Uruk-Hai warrior player gets is definitely a butterknife. It does 25c damage - about the same or less than any decent one-handed weapons, and far less than almost all other 2hand weapons in the game.

Offline Triglav

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2491
  • I'll bite your axe off!
    • View Profile
Re: TLD: Balance issues for 2.3.1
« Reply #35 on: June 18, 2007, 03:09:01 PM »
OT: i think free folk (and possibly corsairs and easterlings) need some sort of prisoner management. i just rescued a lesser host of Rohan from Isengard (losing most of my troops in process) because they had something like 100 prisoners and that would swell Isen's numbers up too much. Orcs eat their prisoners, Harads sacrifice them but Rohan/Gondor just carry them around for no reason, making them too slow to escape and/or pursuit others...

I agree with this.

1. When you free a bunch of prisoners they should form a freed prisoners party that would head towards the nearest friendly unit and join with it. This would make freeing prisoners a combat priority that would bolster the war effort.

2. One should definitely be able to reinforce any allied formation by giving them your troops. Say I am Gondorian and due to some elitist notion that Gondorians are the only good company for me I want a purely Gondorian force, but I rescue a bunch of Rohirrim...Well as it is now, I can actually reinforce Gondorian formations with my Gondorian troops, but I can't give away those brave, though somewhat dim Rohirrim to their formations. Thus I end up with some UN kind of a multinational force, but without any Gondorians, cause I give them all away to build up my side's armies...

yeah, you mentioned this before and it makes sense. My only concern is that I dont want too much reinforcement to occur from the player as it can quickly unbalance things. Thats why I put the strict conditions on it.  I believe you can reinforce gondor or rohan as opposite factions if you have certain traits. At least thats the theory, I cant remember if I hooked it up.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2007, 06:11:36 PM by Ancientwanker »
"Of course, just by reading this forum you get a geek point. If you post you get a lifetime membership card.
If you contribute to the mod your praises are sung by the lords of dorkistan for an age and a half."
-Ancientwanker

Offline Senta

  • Craftsman
  • **
  • Posts: 114
    • View Profile
Re: TLD: Balance issues for 2.3.1
« Reply #36 on: June 18, 2007, 03:18:35 PM »
OT: i think free folk (and possibly corsairs and easterlings) need some sort of prisoner management. i just rescued a lesser host of Rohan from Isengard (losing most of my troops in process) because they had something like 100 prisoners and that would swell Isen's numbers up too much. Orcs eat their prisoners, Harads sacrifice them but Rohan/Gondor just carry them around for no reason, making them too slow to escape and/or pursuit others...

I agree with this.

1. When you free a bunch of prisoners they should form a freed prisoners party that would head towards the nearest friendly unit and join with it. This would make freeing prisoners a combat priority that would bolster the war effort.

2. One should definitely be able to reinforce any allied formation by giving them your troops. Say I am Gondorian and due to some elitist notion that Gondorians are the only good company for me I want a purely Gondorian force, but I rescue a bunch of Rohirrim...Well as it is now, I can actually reinforce Gondorian formations with my Gondorian troops, but I can't give away those brave, though somewhat dim Rohirrim to their formations. Thus I end up with some UN kind of a multinational force, but without any Gondorians, cause I give them all away to build up my side's armies...

agreed on both counts. prisoners joining friendly units would be perfect. no idea how hard it would be to actually implement but i think it would be a great change.

as for point 2, i would say the same but the other way around... who wants these slow and heavy Gondorians in their army ;)

The Snork

  • Guest
Re: TLD: Balance issues for 2.3.1
« Reply #37 on: June 18, 2007, 06:01:28 PM »
"Average speed of a running man over rough terrain, 3 MPH."

Not to nitpick but I believe 3 mph is a very low estimate. That's basically a brisk walk. Consider that a 4-minute mile, which even non-professional athletes can run these days, equates to an average speed of 15 mph. Over shorter distances (100m), sprinters reach top speeds around 25 mph. Even accounting for rough terrain, armor, equipment, etc, 3 mph for a RUNNING man seems far too low. A man in full plate slogging through mud, maybe 2-3 mph is about right.

Looking forward to the RCM for TLD!

Matheus

  • Guest
Re: TLD: Balance issues for 2.3.1
« Reply #38 on: June 18, 2007, 07:18:13 PM »
Every time I try to enter in Caras Galadhon my game crash.

that should go to bug reports Matheus.


I know! Sorry.  :-[ I was too busy with another things and posted on the wrong place.

Offline Ron Losey

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 4418
    • View Profile
Re: TLD: Balance issues for 2.3.1
« Reply #39 on: June 18, 2007, 07:19:45 PM »
"Average speed of a running man over rough terrain, 3 MPH."

Not to nitpick but I believe 3 mph is a very low estimate. That's basically a brisk walk. Consider that a 4-minute mile, which even non-professional athletes can run these days, equates to an average speed of 15 mph. Over shorter distances (100m), sprinters reach top speeds around 25 mph. Even accounting for rough terrain, armor, equipment, etc, 3 mph for a RUNNING man seems far too low. A man in full plate slogging through mud, maybe 2-3 mph is about right.

Looking forward to the RCM for TLD!

Well, OK, to be fair:

Average speed of a running man over rough terrain: 3 MPH
Average speed walking in rough terrain: 1 MPH
Power-walking on flat solid level ground: 3 MPH
Running on a track: maybe 15 MPH.
Olympic sprinter: 25 MPH

Man in armor, carrying weapons, in rough terrain:  possibly zero.

Average-looking Horse:
Trot: about 15 MPH
Gallop with rider and equipment: 30 MPH over most any terrain
Distance run with rider: 40 MPH, on track or level road
Short-distance sprint with rider: 55 MPH or more, on track
Without rider and gear: add maybe 5 MPH to those numbers.
Larger horses will be less affected by rider and gear than the smaller ponies.

And I've spent some time in "rough terrain" - averaging 3 MPH is a HARD RUN in rough terrain.  15 MPH on a street is a LOT easier.  Even maintaining 1 MPH over rough terrain for more than a couple  of hours is not easy - and that's experienced woodsmen, a pair of boots and a 5-pound rifle, not 80 pounds of armor and 20 or 30 pounds of weapons and other junk.

That is the full set of numbers I was keeping in my head.  That's why I didn't model the 40 MPH plus run for the horses either - I was rather assuming less than perfect conditions.

Anyway, hopefully RCM version in a few days.

Aethelred

  • Guest
Re: TLD: Balance issues for 2.3.1
« Reply #40 on: June 18, 2007, 08:09:06 PM »
Well he did say rough terrain, which would limit the distance you can travel in an hour, but not a fair comparison when presumably the horse speeds are not from horses on very rough terrain. Safe to say that on flat terrain even a fully armoured man can run a lot faster than 3mph, if not for very long. 3mph is about right for walking speed. Speed in M&B varies from a crawl to a bizarrely fast looking walk depending on athletics and encumbrance but normally it's somewhere between walking speed and jogging speed.

By the way, when talking about how much slower armoured men would be, bear in mind they're a lot stronger and more used to that lifestyle than any modern person. How fast would a horse go in very rough wooded terrain? I doubt it could reach 30mph safely.

Did a quick test of horse speed versus man speed in an arena in native M&B. From a standing start it takes a practice horse 10 seconds to cross the Rivacheg arena from wall to wall (with riding skill 4). It takes a man on foot 21 seconds (with a two handed sword, arena heraldric armour and plate boots with athletics 3). Over about 50 metres that's about right since humans can accelerate faster, and roughly reflects what I've seen in short distance human vs horse races. I did another test in the four ways in, with the same character on a spirited warhorse (speed 9) running from one edge of the area to another (not up or down the hills at the sides). That took 14.3 seconds for the horse, and 43 seconds for a dismounted man (encumbrance 39.8). Unencumbered the man took 31 seconds. Without knowing the distance I can only estimate but of all the various calculations I've done, I'd say the horse was too slow by about 5-15 mph depending on what the distance is estimated at.

I've no problem with the RCM damage vs unarmoured men, my point was never that you should be able to take lots of hatchet wounds to the chest and survive. Jefz pretty much summed up by doubts regarding the RCM style, like him I don't think it any more realistic to have 10 crappy troops bashing you and not take any damage at all. But I don't anticipate that being such a problem in TLD, so it should suit RCM pretty well, although I'm concerned it will further exaggerate the crapness of lower tier alliance troops who usually have swords rather than heavy or armour piercing weapons like all orc troops often do.

Stemmers?

  • Guest
Re: TLD: Balance issues for 2.3.1
« Reply #41 on: June 18, 2007, 08:18:09 PM »
If you're concerned about troop balance, why don't you help test the RCM? Ron's always been pretty open to suggestions in my experience.  ;)

Aethelred

  • Guest
Re: TLD: Balance issues for 2.3.1
« Reply #42 on: June 18, 2007, 08:32:29 PM »
Maybe, although I thought he was looking for people who've had more experience with RCM stuff. I've only had the experience of playing ONR and discussing it here. But I'm willing to help test.

Nightrider

  • Guest
Re: TLD: Balance issues for 2.3.1
« Reply #43 on: June 18, 2007, 08:43:26 PM »

OT: i think free folk (and possibly corsairs and easterlings) need some sort of prisoner management. i just rescued a lesser host of Rohan from Isengard (losing most of my troops in process) because they had something like 100 prisoners and that would swell Isen's numbers up too much. Orcs eat their prisoners, Harads sacrifice them but Rohan/Gondor just carry them around for no reason, making them too slow to escape and/or pursuit others...

also, is there a reason why there's no rescued prisoners parties? it is a shame for good troops to go to waste as i don't always have enough room for all of them...

Seconded, Thirded ... whatever.

But the point made about the prisoners is very very true, it often contributes heavily towards having uber armies arrayed against you, which in turn can be quite fun though.

I've just come out of a 45-50 day game playing as Gondor, and already Gondor has been crushed ....   :(

I had no problem taking care of the Corsair, Haradrim or Mordor forces (I played with an Infantry/Cav mix), but I just couldn't be every where at once to protect the Great Hosts, Patrols etc, who would invariably just wander off, then attract multiple units who would quickly destroy them.

I think the problem that Gondor has, and one that Rohan doesn't is simply how the area around the Gondorian cities is quite compact and claustrophobic.  Rohan has plenty of places to run to, and theres no where really for the Gondor forces to go except towards Mordor, go south and risk entaglements with Haradrim Patrols, Lesser host .. ditto for the corsairs, the area around Osgiliath is likewise very heavy in the amount of patrols and lesser hosts that will often gang up on isolated Gondor Units. 

I'll point out that this is just my experince from one game, of course the outcome may be different in others games. I have faith I can 'win', i've played it enough times in the previous versions to have some sort of know how.

I know the type of interaction I described creates a very cool dynamic, but Gondor most of the time just gets dominated on it's own.  I had to work very hard, and i'm feeling quite annoyed that through Gondor just wandering around into Orc Territory all my hard work was undone, I just literally coulnd't save enough of the Gondor forces, indeed I wasn't able to find them most of the time ... oh yeah, because they were dead, HAH!

Though of course I will try again on the morrow, such is the addictive nature of the game.

« Last Edit: June 18, 2007, 08:54:46 PM by Ancientwanker »

Offline Ron Losey

  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 4418
    • View Profile
Re: TLD: Balance issues for 2.3.1
« Reply #44 on: June 18, 2007, 10:27:27 PM »
Maybe, although I thought he was looking for people who've had more experience with RCM stuff. I've only had the experience of playing ONR and discussing it here. But I'm willing to help test.

Get me an e-mail address ... I'll send you the file as soon as I get it together.  (Kind of busy today, but hopefully I can get it together in the next day or two.)

Having played ONR more than briefly is close enough to experience ... at least you have some idea of what the feel should be (minus adjustments for the new setting).  I just didn't want testers who had never played the RCM mods, whose comments would always read like "This is really different" and "I'm going to need some time to adjust to this" ... Those comments don't help a bug hunt one bit, because they have no clue what they're looking for.

Also note that the RCM version will not be rebalancing any troops.  If AW wants to do that later, it's his baby.  That may create some slight issues, but I'm not expecting them to be any more serious than the balance bugs in the Native model.

--------------------------------
and in response to the other comment, yes, in real life it is possible for armor to absorb the effects of ten poor attackers beating on you.  In almost every film clip of modern riots, the rioters end up gathering around some cop and beating on him for three minutes before anyone pulls him out, and he still walks away.  Real armor can take a LOT of pounding from totally inadequate weapons (i.e. sticks) without any damage at all.  Or, if a blade does go through, it can be a scratch or it can prove immediately debilitating ... the same armor often fails to protect prison guards from shiv attack, and many of those are fatal.  You never really know ... but it's never a constant curve (with this armor you can take x hits).  That was the effect I was shooting for - a statistical chance that armor would help by a certain degree, but over a wide enough range that you really never knew.

Native tried to cover that issue by making the damage of crude clubs against armor higher than, say, axes (by the time you account for the blunt damage armor bonus).  That's also why the low-end troops with swords seem inadequate ... their swords don't kill anything.